Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (TheTruth05 @ Nov 18, 2016 -> 07:13 AM) I'm interested to see if the switch will play WiiU games because if it doesn't I honestly will feel pretty shafted. It uses cartridges, so the answer is going to be a no.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 08:07 PM) Yeah, but Nintendo not f***ing around is still Nintendo. When I get on the court, I'm not f***ing around, but still couldn't make High School varsity. Look, I get the skeptism, I've been down on Nintendo for a while now. Having said that, they've pretty much done everything right so far with Switch based on what's been announced and rumored. A hybrid was the way to go, allowing for all their resources to focus on one system (eventually) and prevent the long drought without games that we're used to. The price point is perfect at $250 for the device to have mass appeal. And most importantly, they're bringing out all their big guns from the get-go. A huge, open-World Zelda and a brand new 3D Mario (like Mario 64 to boot) both coming out in 2017. Those are all but a guarantee at this point along with the Mario Kart & Splatoon enhanced ports I mentioned. Even with just those four games this system is going to sell like crazy. When was the last time Nintendo had three of their big four franchises (Smash the only one missing) within 6 months or even a year of launch? IMO, this feels like a different Nintendo to me and maybe it's the new CEO driving these changes.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 18, 2016 -> 06:47 AM) He's elite. Pricey for a platoon hitter but the Astros are almost there. This a joke?

If the Astros are willing to give up Bregman, I think Sale ends up in Houston. They've already filled most of their holes without giving up any of their blue chippers. They also seem in desperate need of a legit ace. I'd be absolutely ecstatic with a Bregman, Reed, Tucker, & Musgrove package, although it's probably a bit unrealistic.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 04:10 PM) Ha. Nintendo release schedules. Ha. Fool me once... QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 06:55 PM) Ha, can't argue that. There has been a lot of talk that Nintendo is really trying to get this launch right, because of how botched WiiU was. If they manage launching with 75% of those titles, I will be pretty happy. If they launch with all of them I will be stunned. Interested in the specs given the rumored price point Nintendo also shifted most of their resources to Switch a while ago. Wii U has been pretty much dead all year and even 3DS has seen a slowdown in quality releases. Furthermore, three of the games I mentioned are enhanced ports (if you count the new Zelda) and shouldn't take that much time to develop. I honestly believe we see all those games in the first 12 months of Switch's life. It really like Nintendo finally figured its s*** out for the first time in my adult life. Can't launch with only two 1st party games and then have nothing to offer for months. This is really do or die time for Nintendo and it appears they aren't f***ing around anymore.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 06:30 PM) Take all of this with a giant grain of salt: I have a buddy from Atlanta that is plugged in locally that I talk NFL Draft with. He's a Braves fan. He claims to have a friend that is a scout for Atlanta. He told me that Atlanta can't get Sale because they aren't willing to trade Maitan or Dansby. He said it's Quintana that they are going after. He mentioned Sean Newcomb, Travis Demeritte, and Mallex Smith. That's not enough for Q but like I said this is what he told me. I think teams like the Braves & Pirates make a ton of sense for Quintana. While he's not as sexy as Sale, he's under control for an additional year at an even lower rate. For teams with a young pitching staffs in need of a veteran anchor, it's hard to find a better fit than Jose. Plus he should be cheaper to acquire than Sale.

Rumors about Nintendo Switch's year 1 lineup sounds incredible. New 3D Mario (64 style), new open-world Zelda, Pokémon, updated versions of Mario Kart 8 & Splatoon, Pikman 4, a new game from Retro Studios, and a brand new IP. If you didn't own a Wii U, and let's be honest very few did, this could be an incredible system. And at the rumored $250 price point, this system might just sell extremely well.

QUOTE (CWSpalehoseCWS @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 08:54 PM) Sox prospects in danger of being lost per MLB.com: Chicago White Sox (6) 6. Adam Engel, OF 10. Jordan Guerrero, LHP 12. Jacob May, OF 14. Courtney Hawkins, OF 25. Luis Martinez, RHP 27. Nick Delmonico, 1B/OF Sox have the 40-Man set at 38, so you have to figure two of those guys will be added before Friday. If we're rebuilding, I'd make sure to protect Engel, May, Guerrero, & Delmonico.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 08:09 PM) Dodgers have the prospects to get it done. Whether you like their prospects or not is another thing but they can get it done as well as anyone with their pieces alone. I honestly think they match up well with us. I posted this earlier, but I still think a Sale & Frazier for DeLeon, Bellinger, Verdugo, Calhoun, Alvarez, Barnes, & Sheffield deal would be a haul for us and something Friedman might do. Bellinger, Verdugo, Calhoun, & Barnes could all be up by opening day 2018 (if not sooner) and potentially fill four holes in our everyday lineup. DeLeon immediately fills Sale's spot in the rotation. Without trading any other pieces, we've filled five spots on our 2018 roster and would be able to give them a full year of development before the big 2018/2019 free agent period. Entering the 2019 offseason, this could be your roster: 1B: Bellinger 2B: Calhoun (some DH) SS: Anderson 3B: ? LF: Verdugo CF: ? RF: Eaton DH: Collins (some C) C: Barnes (some 2B) #1: Quintana #2: Rodon #3: DeLeon #4: Fulmer #5: ? CL: Jones SU: Burdi SU: Stephens Key prospects that might be ready by then or at most a year out would include pitchers Adams, Hansen, Alvarez, & Sheffield along with hitters like Michalczewki, Fisher, & Call. These guys would give us some depth and allow us to make some trades to fill holes. We'd also have a ton of financial flexibility and could be serious players in what should an incredible free agent class. Multiple superstars will be available at both 3B & CF. Obviously not all these guys are going to work out, although I strongly believe that by targeting near-ready major league pieces, we greatly reduce that bust factor significantly. Regardless, I think it shows how a Dodgers trade without Urias could still be a huge win for us.

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 07:21 PM) I really dislike the Dodgers prospects for the Sox, a third team would have to get involved Please elaborate.

Top prospect is all pretty relative. Guys like Bellinger & DeLeon are top 25 prospects, but not the Dodgers' #1. However, they'd be the top prospect for a lot of organizations. Having this condition that you must get a team's top prospect in a Sale trade is pretty stupid IMO. You want to get the best overall package and that must measure both quantity and quality. I think the Dodgers could make an incredibly strong offer that doesn't include Urias if they give up a s***-ton of their depth.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 01:19 PM) I can't say enough that if Urias is not in the deal, it's a loss for the Sox. I think this is a poor way to evaluate a potential trade. You have to look at the entire package and not just the centerpiece. Honestly, it probably doesn't matter, because I don't think Friedman will give up Urias. Hope I'm wrong, but I know I wouldn't if I was Friedman unless it was practically a straight-up swap.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 12:47 PM) There are plenty of reasons to be scared. Prospects bust. Here is BPs list of the top farm systems after the 2012 draft. The Sox are last. There are a lot of 4 and 5 star guys you would say "the Sox traded xxx for that?" http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article....articleid=16208 I understand the necessity, but there is no reason to over do it. Trading for prospects is a risky thing. A lot of the guys who seem to be can't miss will wind up being no better than the crap the Sox already have. The Sox cannot cave. Blowing these trades, and taking whatever because "their value will never be higher" could lead to a horrendous decade or two. These trades have to be won. So let me get this straight, if we blow these trades, we could have a "horrendous decade or two", but if we hold them we avoid this risk? So no chance these guys get injured, their performance declines, or they simply leave once their contracts expire? While rebuilding is no doubt risky, doing nothing or very little is far more risky. I don't get the allure of a half-ass rebuild, it's the lack of clear direction over the past few years that has got us in this terrible spot. We need to pick a direction and commit 100% one way or the other.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 10:54 AM) You don't have to though. He has 4 years of control. Can be moved at deadline. Or next offseason. Or the one after. And why would you expect to get better offers then? The starting pitching market will be much better next offseason and Q will have one less year of control. This offseason should provide the Sox with the best estimate of what is fair value for guys like Sale & Quintana.

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 08:17 AM) Eaton, like Sale and Q, would need a blown away package. He's 28 and will not be be a happy camper if we trade most of the veterans. We don't have to move him but he could be a possibility. Yeah, if Adam Eaton threw the hissy fit he did last year over not having a teenage boy in the clubhouse, imagine how he'll be when all his real friends are gone. Given his already estranged relationship with KW, there are some non-production reasons why the front office might want to move him. Still, it would be incredibly stupid for them to move Eaton right now without getting a killer offer. He'll still have a ton of value at the deadline and in the coming year.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 08:06 AM) Tradimg all of their good players away for 20-25 prospects is would be Christmas for some when it happened. The reality is, they will still need more. So either you will have to trade some of those prospects for established players or sign free agents. A free agent with Eaton production 2 or 3 years from now would probably cost $200 million if not more. I don't really buy this idea we need to keep some of our good players. I think every move that we make should be about creating a serious competitive window from 2019/2020 to 2024. Eaton can fit into a portion of that window, but he'll also be a 30 to 31 year old speed-based player by that time. Meanwhile, we'll have wasted anywhere from $60M to $120M of his surplus value during our rebuilding process. I still think there are packages out there for Eaton that will provide more value during that competive window than keeping him provides. IMO, if we get that type of offer, we should definitely take it no matter how good Eaton is today.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 07:33 AM) If a rebuild is successful and in 2 or 3 seasons the Sox can compete, he is still a bargain for multiple years. Again, a top 10 in MLB Position player WAR, and it isn't like he is due to regress. Trading 6 WAR players who aren't about to become free agents, or who don't make a huge amount of money, and hoping you get back a similar player is for fools. 5 seasons from now Adam Eaton will still be paid $2 million less than what a 44 year old Bartolo Colon just signed for. Trading him would be making a trade just to make a trade. It would most likely look stupid in the end. All things considered, he actually is probably more valuable than Sale Well not sure I agree about the regressing part. Eaton is a speed guy, and while he may not steal a ton of bags, he provides a lot of value on the bases and his range in RF is a signicant driver of his value. It's very real possibility he starts declining in the next couple of years. Will he suddenly become a bad baseball player? Hell no, but assuming he's a 6 WAR player three or four years from is a pretty optimistic projection. Also, the idea of a successful rebuild in two to three years is only possible if you're dealing multiple impact pieces. Simply dealing Sale, Frazier, Melky, & Robertson isn't going to be enough. That doesn't mean we have to deal Eaton, but a couple guys like him, Quintana, Abreu, & Jones need to go to accelerate this thing.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 07:18 AM) Adam Eaton is a 6WAR player with 5 years of control for $38 million. Over the last season and a half, he has been one of the top 10 position players in baseball. Why would the Sox trade him? If you are trading him why not Rodon? Why not Anderson? Dick, you're a smart poster and know the answer here. Eaton is at peak value, while Rodon & Anderson could significantly improve their value if they take that next step. You obviously need to be blown away, but there is definitely logic in moving Eaton if the right offer comes along. You'd probably have to get a decent major league piece back in the deal, because we're talking about a guy who could provide $150M to $200M in surplus value over the five years of his contract.

So in the last 24 hours, there have been reports of three teams expressing interest in Sale. That's a promising sign that a market could be developing quickly. I think it would be to our benefit for a Sale resolution to take place prior to the Winter meetings. Assuming someone meets his demands, Hahn could then focus his efforts on moving other pieces at the meetings and improve our chances of making multiple deals. I think any big moves are pretty much on hold onto they decide if Sale will be traded or kept. He's really the first domino that needs to fall.

Look, I hope I'm wrong, but I just don't see it. Regardless, I'm pretty happy with a package built around four BA top 100 prospects (two of which are top 25 guys, another is a top 50), a 20 year old ranked as their #1 prospect by Fangraphs, a 2017 first round comp pick, and a sleeper catching prospect just begging for an opportunity. If Chris Sale wasn't the primary trade piece, I'd feel ridiculous putting all those names in one proposal. Honestly, if blue chippers like Benintendi, Bergman, & Urias are off the table, this is about as good as a deal as we can get.

I really don't see Urias involved in a hypothetical Sale/Frazier. I think Friedman holds his ground there. However, I think a package like the following is possible. De Leon Bellinger Verdugo Alvarez Calhoun Barnes Sheffield That's four guys who could help at some point next year, along with three high-upside guys little further out. IMO, that's an absolute haul even if it's lacking that one blue chipper you'd ideally like.

QUOTE (daggins @ Nov 14, 2016 -> 09:10 PM) Given the typical Sox pace of rumors we won't see anything until the Winter Meetings. Still, any productive talks are a positive. In all honesty, the Sox should pushing hard for a Sale trade ASAP. He's really the chip that makes or breaks a rebuild, so Hahn needs to make sure if his price won't be met, he's still got enough options available to "go for it" it next year.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 14, 2016 -> 09:08 PM) I'd hold off on that; let's see what the sox can do with this bunch. Move Q later, if necessary. And if you move him, it's a full rebuild, so move Eaton. The Sox aren't trading Sale and going to be better in 2017 if that's what you're suggesting.

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Nov 14, 2016 -> 08:54 PM) Could Abreu and Nate Jones bring back Bregman in a trade with Houston? Probably not huh? Don't think they really need Jones and they wouldn't give up Bergman for anything less than an ace IMO.

QUOTE (soxforlife05 @ Nov 14, 2016 -> 05:34 PM) Good then take Moncada. He was considered untouchable until he had a less than impressive 19 AB's. Oh I'll take either one as a centerpiece for Sale, but I'd probably prefer Benintendi all things considered.