Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 10:59 PM) Maybe he watches his starts too. Not just a few K highlights. You're right bro, I'm sure the scouts who have been raving about his stuff for years only watch the highlights. Same goes for the guys at Baseball America, mlbpipeline, etc. who follow prospects for a living and consider him a consensus top 15 prospect. Or the three GMs in a recent survey of 19 who voted him as the best pitching prospect in the game. But hey, you don't like the guy so whatever fits the narrative I guess.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 10:21 PM) Probably mentioned above, but Cameron in chat said today that Glasnow is insufficient as a Q centerpiece: stuff not that good and major control problems. I think his opinion on Glasnow's stuff would put him in the minority.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 09:28 PM) What about Frazier? I know there's only one more year on his contract but that Atlanta lineup, despite having Freeman, still feels a little light on power unless Swason cranks 20+ HR. Combine that with what seems like a glaring weakness at 3rd could there be mutual interest in packaging Frazier? Good clubhouse guy, solid defender, masher of baseballs...makes sense if you ask me. Atlanta trading for a rental doesn't make a lick of sense to me, but then again they traded for Jaime Garcia.

I would be very hesitant dealing with the Braves. First off, I don't get why they'd cash in prospects for a TOR starter right now unless they're trading guys they don't really believe in. The other problem is outside of Swanson & Albies, most of their attractive prospects are either pitchers (which we don't need) or positional guys years aways from contributing. Just doesn't make sense given our needs and timeline IMO.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 07:38 PM) Take a look at the actual players instead of the prospect # in front of their name. Obviously both Bell and Newman have value and aren't bad by any means, but both deserve some scrutiny if we are trading a top SP for them. Do you really want the badly needed hitting prospects we get back for Q to possibly be a 2B and 1B that might not be able to hit 25 hr's between them? I'm all for the depth and we obviously need it, but no position value and no potential impact bat in return would worry me. It's not a deal anyone should cry over, but wanting a potential impact bat for Q shouldn't be unreasonable. And I don't believe the Pirates can offer that if Meadows isn't involved. There's nothing wrong with wanting a potential impact bat for Quintana. I want Meadows just as badly as everybody else and can acknowledge he's far and away the best prospect in Pittsburgh's system. He's no doubt the ideal headliner. But that doesn't diminish the fact that Glasnow, Bell, Keller, & Newman are excellent prospects and considered amongst the top 50 in the game by most publications. They each have their own flaws/weaknesses (like most prospects do), but let's not act like they're at the Basabe & Dunning level. Every single one of them would make a terrific secondary piece and an argument could be made for Glasnow and/or Bell being headliners depending on how positively you view them. Personally, I'd hold my ground a while longer for Meadows and eventually push for a depth trade if they don't give in. IMO, Glasnow, Bell, & Newman would be an absolute haul and one I would take in a heartbeat. I'm doubtful the Pirates would do that deal, but that would be my price without having a positional headliner like Meadows.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 06:23 PM) I get what you are saying, but I'm pretty sure most Sox fans are realistic about who is valuable in tiers. Guys like stephens and call exist in pretty much every organisations top thirty. They are back end of a trade filler or guys that can be dealt in smaller deals. There is a big value drop after meadows in the pirates system. Glasnow is not without big questions about his poor control. Bell is a terrible defensive player, even at first Newman has zero power, value tied to sticking at ss Keller pitched well against A ball competition. Forearm issues in the past. How many prospects in the game are worth a damn to you? 10? 20? Glasnow, Bell, & Newman are all legit top 50 prospects. If you're s***ting on all these guys, you are going to be incredibly dissapointed with our Quintana return.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 04:09 PM) Honestly, any deal with Meadows + either Keller/Newman makes me extremely happy. I literally don't even care what the others are. It could be Meadows/Keller + two members of the grounds crew. This I 100% agree with. Meadows, Newman/Keller, & Craig would be a great trade for us. If Meadows is included, you can't really expect more than that.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 02:53 PM) If that is really the case, they have already dug themselves a huge hole by not getting much in the way of position players at all. Isn't that what you've been telling us since the Winter Meetings? That we needed to get some position players for Quintana or we'd be screwed?

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 02:51 PM) The way to "extend your window of contention" would be to have high-upside talent flowing through your system constantly. I do agree though that Maitan shouldn't be a centerpiece. Well obviously, but you need to build a contender in the first place and that's going to be a challenge if one of the centerpieces of your remaining blue chipper is 4+ years away from reaching the majors and another year or so from being productive most likely.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 02:32 PM) Maitan is one of the highest ceiling guys in all of baseball. If your goal is to really open a long window of contention, this is exactly the type of guy who you target. He has future superstar written all over him. When do you realistically expect him to be a productive member of our team? How many years of control will we have left with the rest of our core by that point? With a rebuild you want a core of players all hitting the majors in a short period of time. That's how you optimize your window of contention.

QUOTE (Frank_Thomas35 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 12:54 PM) If we are talking about Brave packages I need Albies and Maitan to be the headliners in any deal. Maitin, even though extremely young may be the position player I want the most if we can't get a Meadows, Bell, Tucker, etc. QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 12:56 PM) That is exactly what I feel too. Maitan is a good 4+ years away. What good does that do for our rebuild? Our headliners should be guys that will be in the majors by 2019 at the latest. Some of you guys are so obsessed with getting bats that you're not thinking straight right now.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 10, 2017 -> 07:53 PM) Something would have to be done to rectify this from the Pirates side, probably remove Hayes or Diaz (or both) but once that's done this makes sense for all involved. I know I'm making a big fuss about not waiting to deal Quintana, but waiting to trade Robertson is even riskier. At least Quintana is good. Now the stakes with Robertson obviously are nowhere near as high as they are with Q, but using him as grease to get a bigger deal done makes sense. I would also do a similar deal with the Yankees for Rutherford. What risk is there waiting to deal Robertson? The rumor from raBBit was that he doesn't have much of a market right now. Might as well give him a chance to rebuild his value. And relievers are the ideal chips to move at the deadline.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 10, 2017 -> 01:04 PM) I am trying to figure out why this guy is rated so highly with those kind of prospect grades. I mean we are talking about a guy who is going to generate an older Juan Pierre's numbers offensively as the best position player in a deal, and that excites people? What am I missing here? Probably the huge difference in walk rates.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 11:27 PM) Absolutely. And i understand the point that there will be pitchers available next offseason but i don't agree that diminishes his value. I don't think you can cavalierly say "it's just money" when it's $100M+. Just look at the new tax. Just look at the 20 or so teams who can't pay that anyway. We'll be seeing $35-$40M AAVs in the next few years which makes him more valuable. Sox are licking their chops if they have to wait. You keep saying this, but how are any of the above factors different than today? All else held constant, the more SP options available the less valuable Quintana becomes. He is literally the only TOR starter available right now. Think about that for a minute. Teams desperate for a TOR starter right now literally have no alternatives. Why do we think our price will suddenly be met come July when less teams will be in contention, other options will be available, and certain trade chips will be now be off limits? There is a reason the Sox decided not to sell at the deadline last year. You're typicallly better off going with the largest possible market vs. gambling for one desperate buyer, at least with cost-controlled assets.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 11:19 PM) The same reason Cubs and Indians paid up. Pressure on GMs. Pressure on GMs who may not be around when some prospect hits the bigs in a year or two. They paid up for elite relievers in a huge seller's market. The market dynamics could be totally different this coming July, especially for starting pitchers. I get there is the chance one GM does something crazy out of desperation, but the odds of that are low and not worth the risk of injury or underperformance reducing Quintana's value IMO. Also, GMs at the deadline typically value immediate production vs. long term production, especially if they have multiple holes to fill. Look at what the Dodgers did with Reddick & Hill. They went the rental route instead cashing in any of their elite prospects for a cost-controlled difference maker. I no doubt agree there is typically a premium paid at the deadline, but there is also a limit on how much teams will pay in an individual trade, which is one of the main reasons teams shop in the short-term bin. Every once in a while you may see a Cole Hamels trade, but everything must line up right in terms of supply, demand, prospect capital, & appetite in order for that to happen. Again, I just don't see the odds of getting a far more desirable return six to 12 months from now being that great.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 10:14 PM) Then wait for a team's level of desperation to change. We have valued him fairly given his contract status. If teams like the Pirates and Astros think their rotations are satisfactory, then wish them good luck and we'll see if they have the best deal come midseason. Look how we're already saying that the value of Torres changed for the Yankees just in a 3 month period - there will be different teams in the game in June. There will also be different sellers in the game come the trade deadline. Quintana will be less attractive to many teams when rentals are available at a far more affordable price. Next offseason, the big market teams will have a variety of pitching options to choose from that only cost money. That leaves mid-market teams and there is no guarantee they'll still have massive holes in their rotation (Astros) or will still be going for it (Pirates). And let's not ignore there are realistically only a handful of teams that have the prospect capital to land Quintana. I just can't find any rational argument for why we think we'd get more six or 12 months from now. The offers received this offseason should pretty much indicate Quintana's value IMO.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 09:31 PM) Glasnow/Keller/Newman/Hayes? Not that these are the end all be all and clearly they are a bit out of date, but here are Baseball America's mid-season rankings: 1. Moncada 4. Giolito 6. Glasnow 10. Meadows 38. Bell 48. Lopez 51. Newman 72. Hayes 93. Kopech* (top 30 to 40 now) 100 - 150: Basabe & Dunning Anyways, the point of this exercise was to show how a proposed Glasnow, Bell, Newman return compares to those of the Sale & Eaton deals. And while Glasnow's stock has slipped a bit, I don't see much of an argument for him not being a top 20 prospect still. His value is comparable to Giolito's and I'd say Bell's is comparable to Lopez's. However, Newman is a far superior prospect to Dunning, which makes the overall return better than the Eaton deal. And honestly, it's probably not too far off from the Sale deal, although I think Moncada is such an elite prospect makes it a clear cut better return. I think asking for a fourth prospect, especially one like Hayes, is asking for too much. I'd feel pretty comfortable saying with Hayes included that's a better return than what we got for Sale and I don't see that happening. Edit: Shack, ignore my post, thought you listed Bell instead of Keller. Might be a bit more realistic then, although BA now has Keller ranked 2nd ahead of both Bell & Glasnow. Would prefer more proven bats, but it would hard to pass up that much talent.

Dumb question, but why is Bell untouchable? The Pirates have a decent platoon option at 1B between Jaso & Freese. Don't get me wrong, Bell has a chance to be a special hitter and I'd hate to get rid him too if I was Huntington, but I think he's more than tradable. And 1B is one of the easiest/cheapest positions to fill at the moment. This isn't Benintendi or Bregman we're talking about here. Quite frankly, I think it's ridiculous to say he's off limits.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 09:14 PM) Kyle Tucker, AJ Reed, Franklin Perez, and Jason Martin OR Tyler Glasnow, Josh Bell, Kevin Newman, and Yeudy Garcia? Seems like this is the neighborhood everything is breaking down to? Not sure which 1 I prefer honestly. I've been pretty firmly in the "have to trade Q now" camp, but if something like these 2 offers are what is best available I might honestly lean towards gambling on Q and trading him at the deadline. Worst case scenario it will be another few months for our scouts to see some of these guys a little longer at a higher level than last year. If you can get Glasnow, Bell, & Newman you take that deal immediately. Short of landing Meadows, you can't do better than that IMO. Not feeling that Astros deal at all. Would want Martes over Perez and would need a better fourth piece than Martin.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 08:44 PM) Cashman with some comments on Sox/Q http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/01/bria...p;post-id=82247 Yankees aren't ready to take the plunge and I don't blame them. This is going to come down to Houston or Pittsburgh, which I think we already knew.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 08:08 PM) We gonna get our rumbunter on again? https://twitter.com/rumbunter/status/818638418213224449 Rumbunter is implying Meadows & Bell are off limits. They also think the package would be built around Glasnow & Newman. Under those conditions, I don't think there is a third player they could offer that would beat out a potential Astros deal headlined by Martes & Tucker with two other pieces. Keller is perhaps the one exception, but I'd rather get a couple offensive prospects from Houston like Reed, Fisher, Leareano, Stubbs, etc instead.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 04:58 PM) Sure is good that America decided a mentally ill narcissist with zero experience or ability to comprehend his job but a bigly desire to insult people on twitter was the right person for President. We can thank all those people who were too proud to vote for "Crooked Hilary" and instead didn't vote or wasted theirs on a 3rd party candidate. Absolutely pathetic.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 04:28 PM) Actually, 65 innings was in 2015. He only threw about 56 last season (2016). So yeah not very close at all. 2+ at best. You're missing his stint in the AFL, which would put him at about 79 innings. Still not great, but better than 56.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 01:02 PM) It is also why the Sox rebuild is more likely to fail than the Cubs. Cubs fans allowed them to spend during their rebuild. That isn't going to happen here. How much of our total revenue comes from attendance and other day of game streams? How much of our attendance comes from season ticket holders and how many of them are going to leave? We're no doubt going to take a revenue hit, but it may a lot smaller than you're anticipating. And when you factor that our payroll obligations will almost non-existent, we should have plenty of money to work with in free agency IMO.

I may be in the minority here, but I'll happily take a pitcher like Glasnow if I'm also getting two high caliber offensive prospects like Bell & Newman. I don't buy this "you can never have too much pitching" mindset, but I think there's room for one more prospect with TOR potential. The key is you have to get some bats back, even if you don't get an untouchable like Meadows included in the deal.