Chicago White Sox

I think it's impossible to separate Reinsdorf's direction/influence vs. KW's production. We know Jerry meddles, with known examples include forcing the front office to keep Ozzie and forcing them to go with the rotating DH disaster that turned out to be Kotsay. I'm sure there are plenty of other instances, especially on the people side where his unwavering loyalty has surely been an issue. And more importantly, we know for a fact he hasn't allowed for a legit rebuild in recent years when one was probably needed, which would be fine if he actually gave his front office the financial resources needed to build a winner. That being said, I think KW's ego has gotten the best of him recently. He used to make some terrific moves, picking up undervalued assets on the regular. Just seems like we're making a lot less of those moves nowadays. Seems like our scouting has fallen off quite a bit under his watch, especially the pro scouting team. While I don't necessarily blame him for the Wilder fiasco, he must wield some responsibly for allowing the system to completely rot for an unacceptable period of time. He deserves a ton of credit for that 2005 team, but I think it's officially time for a chance.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 29, 2016 -> 01:58 PM) To be fair, they didn't "come out and say it" Someone else is reporting what they heard. Onley said the Sox told the Cubs they wouldn't deal with them. That's coming out and telling everyone, unless you think GMs don't talk.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Nov 29, 2016 -> 01:54 PM) Good move if it's for our elite talent. Their success hurts the Sox an incredible amount, whether people here want to accept that or not. While I agree with this, there is absolutely no benefit to come out and say it and lose some leverage.

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Nov 28, 2016 -> 01:54 AM) Still holding out hope for Mark Cuban, but I would certainly take Barry O. Pretty sure Reinsdorf despises Cuban, so I doubt that would ever happen, but it would be awesome if it did.

I think some of you are really overthinking this Dodgers payroll thing. Despite recent losses, the team isn't hurting for cash, they simply need to be below 12x leverage per MLB rules for new ownership groups. They had $95M in payroll obligations last year on players not on their roster or 1/3 of their $300M payroll. They've also spent ridiculous amounts of money on international free agents. Given their $8B TV deal (among other sources of revenue), all they need to do is be a bit more frugal for a year or two while some of the dead weight and overpriced guys come off the books. I can promise you they will continue to look to improve their roster with win now pieces. If anything, this makes a guy like Sale more attractive to them than picking up a guy with a huge contract.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Nov 27, 2016 -> 07:35 PM) Looks like the topic starters credibility just went nose diving ? Yeah, sucks that "nobody is off limits" rumor regarding the Astros & Dodgers is bulls***.

Might want to change the thread title, because this seems like complete bulls*** IMO.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Nov 27, 2016 -> 06:29 PM) So Chicago would be a "Sanctuary City", which violates the Second Amendment and my favorite team would be owned by Barak Obama. So, exactly why would I be a Sox fan? Oh, never mind, I wouldn't be. If this is your reasoning for abandoning the Sox, then trust me, you won't be misssd.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Nov 25, 2016 -> 06:05 PM) Napoli is 35 and he made 7 Mil this year on a 1 year deal. My guess is he will probably sign another 1 or even a 2 year at 5 or 6 per year. For what it's worth, mlbtraderumors has Napoli getting a 2/$28M deal. While I think that's a bit high, I think it's much closer to reality than your estimate.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 25, 2016 -> 02:36 PM) Why wouldn't he fit at 3B? Long term, that is his best value. If 3B is his better position, then I'm totally cool with that. All I was trying to get at is that guys like Saladino & Sanchez are not big enough prospects to have an any impact on the decision.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 25, 2016 -> 02:28 PM) I do. But I would rather be stable at 3B than 2B. If it happens, I would rather have a guy like Bregman stable at one position, than to have him moving to another to accommodate. If Saladino were to get hurt, we have a guy like Carlos Sanchez who could step in at 2B much easier than 3B. But why does it matter? Next year will be a lost season, might as well keep Bregman where he best fits long-term. If Sanchez or Davidson has to play some 3B, who really cares, neither of these guys is going to be a starter on our next competitive team.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Nov 25, 2016 -> 08:45 AM) Yeah nothing wrong with "just" being a reliever nowadays. He can be very valuable to the team as either the closer or a multi inning reliever. Obviously the pitching coaches and scouts would know best, but just seems like a square peg in round hole trying to make him a starter to me. It's fine if he ultimately ends up as a reliever, but we're going to need starters from somewhere and he's still our best hope of becoming one at the moment. Let's give him every opportunity to become one in 2017. Next year should be a lost season, so having a compentant bullpen should be the least of our problems.

It will be interesting to see what the Sox do with both Fulmer & Burdi. I strongly believe the Sox will be trading Sale, Gonzalez, & Robertson this offseason, leaving them with only Quintana, Rodon, & Shields in the rotation and only Jones as a true back-end reliever. And while I expect the Sox to a major league ready pitcher to step in for Sale, there should still be an opening in the rotation and the need for a high leverage reliever. Based on how this front office has operated in the past, it's got to be extremely tempting for the Sox use Fulmer & Burdi to plug these holes. However, I think both should start 2017 in AAA and be used as starters. Fulmer clearly wasn't ready for the majors last year and I don't want to see up until he proves himself in AAA in addition to his service resetting to the point where 2017 doesn't count as full year of control. As for Burdi, the Sox should try to do everything in their power to make him a starter before settling for a reliever. Even if the experiment ultimately fails, it will be good for the development of his secondary offerings and gets him some more seasoning.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 25, 2016 -> 07:02 AM) Why do some people who want Bregman want to play him at third? He'd be far more valuable at a middle infield position. He just played more 3B than second the last year and a half because of Correa and Altuve. You're right, he probably makes the most sense at 2B for us. In all honesty, we shouldn't play him at 3B to give lesser guys like Saladino or Sanchez the job at 2B. Play him where his best long-term fit and worry about the other position later. And while this is both a bit far-fetched and premature, Machado & Donaldson will be free agents after the 2018 season. We don't have to fill every spot with a long-term solutions immediately. If a rebuild is done right, we should have plenty of financial & prospect resources to plug holes in a few years.

Sale - Goes Quintana - Stays Robertson - Goes Fraizer - Goes Jones - Stays Abreu - Stays Melky - Goes Eaton - Stays Jennings - Goes

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 24, 2016 -> 03:12 PM) I would think with a 2 million vote lead and the corruption that exists, Hillary may win. I'd give her odds of 50/50 minimum maybe 60/40 she is our next President. How can anyone read this nonsense and actually believe Greg isn't a troll?

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Nov 24, 2016 -> 02:55 PM) Who would ya'll rather have Benintendi package from Boston or Bregman package from Houston? I actually would really love to see an Anderson and Bregman infield for the next 6 years at least. As much as I love Benintendi, I'd probably go with a Bregman led package. Houston has a much deeper system IMO and could provide several high-end prospects in addition to Bregman. They also have much more interesting secondary pieces that can fill the back-end of a deal.

QUOTE (striker @ Nov 24, 2016 -> 11:30 AM) It will be interesting to see what window of contention the Sox aim for based on their trades. The Ranger's prospects appear to be farther from the majors than what the Astros or Dodgers can offer. But that also aligns more with the talent in their pipeline It does? Fulmer, Burdi, Collins, Adams, Stephens, & Michalczewski will all be in AA and above. If you throw in Peter, that's seven of our top 10 prospects (let me point I don't consider him a top 10 guy). The other three guys are Hansen, Fisher, & Call and they could all start 2017 in A+ and be fast movers. The next tier of prospects are predominantly in AA and above as well (Engel, May, Tilson, Danish, Guerrero). Honestly, the vast majority of our minor league talent is about a year or two out.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Nov 24, 2016 -> 09:22 AM) Don't count out the Rangers also making a serious bid for Sale. Darvish will be a free agent soon and they'd like to max his last year by adding Sale and making a very serious run this year. The 2 horse race will have at least 4 teams running neck and neck down the stretch. This race has only just reached the 1/4 pole . Just don't see what the Rangers could offer that bests the Astros, Dodgers, or Red Sox. I'd basically need Odor, Mazara, Gallo, & a couple of their best pitching prospects and simply don't see them moving two guys off their major league roster. Texas really blew it because they traded away a lot of talent to get Lucroy & Beltran. They could have probably built a package if they still had all those prospects.

Coats is definitely a guy you consider giving an everyday role to in a rebuilding year. Obviously you got to see who is traded and who we get back in return, but Coats has enough of a prospect pedigree to get an extended look. I don't really see him ending up as a regular, but stranger things have happened.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Nov 24, 2016 -> 01:18 AM) Why no Martes? Because I think Bregman, Reed, & Tucker is already a huge ask. Let them keep Martes in exchange for Paulino if that's what it takes to get a deal done. That's not to say Hahn shouldn't be pushing for him at the start of negotiations.

My dream trade with the Astros is Sale for Bregman, Reed, Tucker, Paulino, & Stubbs. That would be an absolute haul IMO, alllowing us to fill three holes (2B, 1B, & SP) immediately and potentially have CF & C solutions down the road.

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Nov 24, 2016 -> 12:41 AM) How the hell do you know? So if Luhnow comes calling with the deal, Hahn's reaction should be.... "Well, we obviously love Bregman, he's legit. Martes and Tucker are two great prospects we'd love to have.....BUT DEVENSKI? f*** YOU BRO. YUCKY POO POO, NEVER CALL ME AGAIN!" So fine, swap out Devenski for their 15th best prospect, it's nothing worth being so hung up over. Well Devenski just put up a 2.8 fWAR season, so I'm pretty confident they'd sell him as an important piece. Having said that, I don't see why a contending team would want to give up a key reliever in the first place. And I'm not sure what the point of your mock conversation is. Like I said, give me a different piece than Devenski. If I were Hahn I'd demand someone like A.J Reed instead. This is called negotiations, you don't have to take the first offer like your little mock conversation suggests.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 24, 2016 -> 12:31 AM) Devenski makes no sense because: 1) We already have Fulmer, Burdi, Stephens, Hansen and Adams for those innings (now and in the future). (Or Shields). 2) Taking him back would make the White Sox look a bit like they made a mistake in the first place. 3) You gamble on position players with higher ceilings/bust rates at the lower levels of the minors before trading for players on the major league roster that you're more than likely just going to try to flip anyway. While #2 is nonsense, I agree with you on #1 & #3. We have much bigger needs to worry about than middle relief.

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Nov 24, 2016 -> 12:22 AM) How is he a key piece? Because his name was listed second? I think that was done by the poster simply because he is the 2nd best major leaguer in that deal, the other 2 are prospects. In 2015 he started 22 games and threw 139 innings. In 2016 with the Astros, he spot started 5 games and threw 108 innings. He's no more of a reliever than Hector Santiago was with us, and he's thrown 180+ IP each of the last 3 years. At worst, Devenski could be a 2-3 IP at a time guy, and that's only if the Sox don't give him a rotation spot once they move Sale and Quintana. Because there are four total players in that proposed trade and he's an established major leaguer to some extent. We'd be forgoing a pretty decent prospect by including him in the trade. And quite frankly, I'm not buying him putting up anywhere close to those numbers again. He still may be a solid reliever, but I'm skeptical he'll ever be an elite one again. Like I said, I just don't see the point of having be a key piece in a Chris Sale trade.