Eminor3rd

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 01:37 PM) Yeah, Pirates fans are much more realistic and i wish a few of them were GM's. I read an article yesterday by a Pitt writer that said the Pirates should trade Meadows, Glasnow and Bell for Q. Man do I wish that guy was the Pitt GM.lol. Good call on the Astros fans. They say similar things about Q that the Yankee fans do. Quite humorous. Do you read the s*** that WE type sometimes?

We could technically see Avi Garcia in RF, Willy Garcia in LF, and Leury Garcia in CF at some point. And it would be the saddest OF in White Sox history.

I think its possible they simply like him more than Coats

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 04:43 PM) What you and a lot of people aren't getting tho is that the buyer never sets the market value. We as fans and even the front office of the Sox can put whatever value on Sale/Q we want, but if no team meets that price it's just an imaginary value. Value is set by the buying teams. Boston's offer was exactly what Sale's value was...obviously because that's the deal we took making it the best offer on the table. Not to mention saying that the deal was a top 20 prospect "light" is absolutely ridiculous. Assuming you meant to say the SELLER never sets the market. If so, you are totally right.

I think Meadows is the BPA, so I'd take anything reasonable with him in it, even if the second-best guy was a bit underwhelming. That said, the Yankees system has so much high second-tier depth, that I may prefer a package of several of those guys. For example, anything where Rutherford is the secondary piece is probably a big win, and the same may be true of Kaprielian. If it's possible to get both fot hose guys and neither of them be the headliner, that's the best package. EDIT: I don't think the Cubs or the Rockies are realistic candidates, however, because the Cubs simply don't NEED Quintana (though of course they would certainly be better with him) enough to mortgage a big piece of the farm, and because the Rockies don't EVER do anything that makes any sense, whatsoever.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 31, 2016 -> 03:44 PM) Isn't that where a lot of Quintana's value lies, though? In his contract? What about next year makes you think that these pitchers aren't going to be commanding deals in the realm of 3 times what Quintana makes? I'll be frank, as long as Quintana continues to perform, I am not concerned with market liquidity, because Q is going to stack up as an outstanding asset no matter how developed or diverse the competition. Yes, but the tremendous value in prospects traded can be expressed in dollars as well. At the end of the day, more options means a worse market. Quintana's value also decreases even if he pitches like he did last year, because of a year less control. It isn't that he won't be a good asset next year, but there's no reason to believe that the offers we're getting now aren't the best ones that will ever show up. It's not a certainty, because who knows who else will enter the fray next year, but it is clearly unlikely.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Dec 31, 2016 -> 02:34 PM) Add Giolito and Kopech to the list of pitchers with walk issues. That's what I don't understand why people are down on Glasnow due to his walk rates when we've already been through it with Rodon, going through it now with Fulmer, Giolito had problems in his pro debut and Kopech had problems in the minors. Heck, my concern isn't over Glasnow's walk rates, it more about getting a few solid hitting prospects in any trade for Q. For me, one of Bell or Meadows has to be in the deal with Glasnow. And Giolito and Kopech were available ONLY because those issues represent serious risk. That's the same issue that's made Glasnow available at all. It doesn't mean he isn't valuable, but if correcting control issues was easy, the Pirates wouldn't even be talking about Quintana because they'd be planning on Glasnow being in their rotation instead.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 31, 2016 -> 01:08 PM) You tell them if they wait, the price increases. If you allow the Pirates the luxury of waiting until June or July to see how their big league team is faring, you take on the risk that Quintana will either injure himself or his performance will degrade, thus affecting his value on the market. To me, a few posters have nailed it on the head - there just is not a lot of real pressure on the Pirates to fork over what the White Sox want right now, particularly if they are looking up at the Cubs and saying "what are the odds..." But let's say they are competing in late June or early July and they need to add SP. Then they come knocking. You are going to let them have the same deal we asked for in the offseason? Maybe you will...but you need to make them believe that if they want to play hardball today, during the offseason, that they should fully expect that we will play hardball with them if they come back at the deadline. You have to at least make them believe there is that threat. For me, if I was Huntington, and I believed in my team, and I really like Quintana, that might just be enough to put me over the edge and just get the deal done now. The price DOESN'T increase, though. Next year's free agent SP class is fantastic, and a bunch of those guys are going to be available at the deadline. You're (all) right that we shouldn't feel the need to move Q for a weak deal, but this is STILL the best opportunity to move him in the foreseeable future, so the goal still absolutely needs to be moving him now. And I'll reiterate again that his "value" has nothing to do with what Chris Sale or other comparable pitchers got in return -- it has to do with how many suitors there are and what those suitors are willing to pay. Every time a guy moves (like Sale) the market changes, because the highest bidder just left the room.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 30, 2016 -> 09:47 PM) Which trade would you accept for Q? Do the other teams accept these deals? Q to the Yankees for Frazier, Rutherford, Kaplielian, and Sands Q to the Braves for Albies, Maitian, Soroka, and Toussaint Q to the Astros for Martes, Tucker, Fisher, and Stubbs Q to the Pirates for Glasnow, Bell, Diaz, and Escobar Probably Yankees, followed by #Barves

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 30, 2016 -> 04:29 PM) Eh, Rogers wrote it a week ago and dodgers acquiring too many outfielders has been a thing for a while. And I was more sympathetic to idea Dodgers cared about salary prior to Jansen, Turner and Hill. Not to say this happens but Phil has written much worse than an offseason 8 hypothetocal trades articles. Right but Pederson, Ethier, Puig, Toles, Thompson, Ruf already. I think they've shown they'll still spend money on stuff they need, but why spend a ton of money on their 7th MLB outfielder? The Dodgers would be insane to acquire McCutchen, ESPECIALLY if they did it instead of Dozier AND used a prospect that will almost definitely contribute to the 2017 rotation if they don't move him.

QUOTE (fredmanrique @ Dec 30, 2016 -> 04:26 PM) What if quintana goes somewhere that isnt NYY or PIT but all the discussions ultimately send other players to those clubs. Just killing time, a scenario such as this feels nice: Q to Hou: Tucker, Martes, Reed, Cameron Rodon, Robertson to NYY: Rutherford, Mateo, Andujar Abreu, Jones to PIT: Newman, Keller, Hayes Would be #1 farm system for sure. Miguel Gonzalez for OD ace.

C = Ron Karkovice 1B = Frank Thomas 2B = Ray Durham SS = Paco Martin 3B = Greg Norton OF = Lyle Mouton OF = Lyle Mouton OF = Lyle Mouton SP = Jose Quintana SP = Jason Bere SP = Chris Sale SP = Mark Buerhle SP = Lyle Mouton RP = Keith Foulke RP = Lyle Mouton Honorable Mentions: Lyle Mouton

QUOTE (RockfordJim @ Dec 30, 2016 -> 01:37 PM) Just saw this. Sorry if its already been discussed. http://sportsmockery.com/2016/12/mlb-insid...cago-white-sox/ Lol Phil Rogers strikes again. Seemingly completely unaware of the Dodgers active roster, the fact that the Dodgers are actively trying to reduce long-term dead money, or the fact that De Leon is close to being the centerpiece in a Dozier deal, which is a player the Dodgers actually need.

QUOTE (Deadpool @ Dec 29, 2016 -> 03:44 PM) His prime isn't much. Do GMs still care about "on pace for" homer numbers? No, they don't -- but for us it means he is more than capable of putting up a crazy strong month prior to the deadline and netting us a real prospect.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 29, 2016 -> 03:30 PM) Lawrie was at one time good enough to be trade for Josh Donaldson. He will probably get injured and have mediocre numbers, but he has done well in the past. He's playing for a contract, and has some talent. Probably nothing will come of it, but its a better chance than a lot of players. Exactly. He has at least as much potential as Saladino. The good news is, there's no reason not to let everyone just compete for jobs. If Saladino outplays Lawrie, then he'll be the guy. As much as I loathe the continued existence of Avisail Garcia, the same goes with the OF. No reason not to let everyone continue to push. All you Jason Coats fans rejoice: he'll have a chance to prove you all correct. And for the GreenSox school of posters: rebuilds are about asset collection. One thing that every successful modern rebuild has in common is one or two extremely valuable pieces that were discovered from the scrap heap -- amidst the corpses of a thousand others that were also acquired. Signing has-beens and post-hype sleepers is all good news. The more the merrier. Even guys that are too old to be a part of the next winner are trade bait if they break out. The Brewers are doing this right now, too. They've already found Jonathan Villar, and there are more intriguing possibilities behind him. This is the new way to take your owner's today-money and send it to the future -- the league has successfully capped spending on every form of amateur now.

Whatever leftover DH gets a one-year deal with the Sox will not be a barrier to ANYONE's playing time. If hell freezes over and Avi learns baseball, he'll get plenty of ABs

QUOTE (hi8is @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 05:15 PM) Got me

QUOTE (beautox @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:31 AM) Give him the reps at the keystone before moving him to CF an infield of Torres / Anderson / Moncada / 1B? could be something special. I just think we might be better served with a possibly elite CF than a passable 2B. I mean, in a post-shift world, 2B is a spot where Neil Walker and Daniel Murphy can fake it. I feel like Moncada's toolset may be wasted there.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:20 AM) All I know is that it is very tantalizing thinking about a future infield featuring both Moncada and Torres in it. Wow! Honestly, the reason I'd be excited about Torres is that it might mean Moncada gets shifted to CF, which makes a TON of sense to me. Seems like a much better place to get the most out of a guy with elite speed and a plus arm but shaky hands and footwork.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:00 AM) Agreed. The Yankees have so much positional talent. They also have about 4 guys who could headline a deal by themselves. Granted I want to see the Sox clean off of the top of the Yankees, list, but at the same time, there are a lot of ways a deal could get done as they have both depth and quality through their system. The telling thing is that even with all of the names listed, there are still plenty of other quality guys who haven't been discussed. Billy McKinney hasn't been mentioned, and neither have guys like Wilkerman Garcia, Donny Sands, or Leo Molina that could be on the back end of a deal. Totally forgot about Garcia. Acevedo and Holder are two guys that are clearly third tier but would slot into our top ten before this December. The more I think about it, the harder it is for me to believe that Torres will get moved. Not that Quintana isn't worth Torres, but just that it would seem so counter-productive to what Cashman has been building. And while top end talent is always the goal as you said, getting 5 or 6 of those second/third tier Yankees prospects would do our system a TON of good.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 10:46 AM) Rutherford is not a good enough prospect to headline a Quintana deal on his own. He would be a second piece and Frazier and/or Torres (preferably Torres) would be the main headliner Honestly, I think he IS if it is a deal with a ton of depth instead of one that is top-heavy like we usually expect. The strength of the Yankees system is that it is chock full of guys like that. Rutherford/Kaprielian/Mateo/Sheffield, for example, would be a pretty amazing haul.

My guess is that the Sox want Torres to headline, but the Yankees are refusing and offering Frazier instead. The Yankees, realizing Hahn has enough other suitors to not budge from Torres, are looking for ways to add more value if they're going to give up Torres. I'd be shocked if it would be both Torres and Frazier. Like mentioned above, best case IMO is Torres/Rutherford + a couple interesting arms like Domingo Acevedo and/or Jonathan Holder, or maybe even Torres/Kaprielian + a couple smaller guys. And we should be happy with that. Yes, you could theoretically max out by separating the pieces, but you can't expect literally EVERY deal to come at max efficiency, and if all it takes to grease the deal is an expensive reliever, then just do it and move on. Sox still have Nate Jones to use to exploit the reliever market.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 10:06 AM) I think posters are in for a world of dissapointment if they think we'd get both Torres & Frazier in a Quintana deal. Robertson is worth something, but his addition is not resulting in another top 20 prospect, even if we pay some cash. I think any framework here revolves around one of two pairs of headliners, with either Torres + Rutherford (more desirable) or Frazier + Mateo (less desirable). Perhaps adding Robertson is what's required to get the Yankees to include Torres in a trade, as he may be the lone "untouchable" in the system. I think the complementary pieces would primarily be pitching based, with maybe a lesser positional prospect like Andujar included. Honestly, a Torres, Rutherford, Sheffield, + package for Quintana & Robertson would be a huge haul IMO. I think expecting much more than that is completely unrealistic. Agreed

QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 22, 2016 -> 01:24 PM) Actually drove through South Park Colorado this summer on a college recruiting visit for my daughter. Did you stop and eat at SoDoSoPa?

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 22, 2016 -> 01:18 PM) South Park reference for the win haha I mean it's Colorado, so it works, right?