Feeky Magee

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:01 PM) Or Soto isn't that great anyway, and wasn't going to get a major league deal, so the White Sox didn't give him one either. It's a minor-league deal with $2m guaranteed on making the roster and a further year's option. It's a major-league deal in all but name.

Decent. He was one of the only free agent catchers who can hit somewhat respectably and not be a framing liability. Sox now have both Giovanni Soto and Geovany Soto.

The golden rule to consider before you propose a trade involving your team - would you accept this if you were the GM of the other team? GMs would probably accept roughly 0.34% of proposed online trades.

QUOTE (miracleon35th @ Dec 29, 2016 -> 06:45 PM) What difference does it make who catches if the goal is to tank the season, lose more games than any other team, and try for the top Draft pick? Well another goal of rebuilding is to gain prospects by trading your valuable MLB pieces. If Nate Jones has a 3.30 ERA when he should really have a 2.15 because we have a butcher receiving pitches, then that makes us less likely to gain more valuable prospects. In addition to this, we're likely to see a number of talented young pitchers make their debuts. If we have them throwing to a Navarro-type receiver, they are more likely to learn bad habits such as starting to pitch more towards the centre of the strike zone, habits which could cost the Sox in the future.

Wonder if the Sox might target MiLB free agent C Willians Astudillo. Has a MiLB strikeout rate of around 3%. Barely walks either and has no power but could be a good BABIP season away from hitting .300 in the majors. Apparently throws and receives very well too. Fascinating player. http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playe...&position=C

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2016 -> 11:45 AM) Reed was never a complete failure at the major league level either. He was usually at least OK. Oh for sure, but last year he took a huge step up

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 29, 2016 -> 11:38 AM) Not calling you out but I don't understand why several people want to see Matt Davidson yet don't want anything to do with Avi Garcia playing in a rebuild. At least Avi failed in the major leagues. What is it about Matt Davidson that screams anything but in two weeks we will have seen more than enough, if it even takes that long? Yes his numbers improved his 4th year of AAA, but his OPS was still .001 lower than Leury Garcia's. Meanwhile Addison Reed actually turned out to be really, really good (although typically, after he left the Diamondbacks)

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 29, 2016 -> 06:52 AM) I agree. We're probably looking at a deal less than what we gave up for him (not hating on that deal though since I don't think any of those guys will amount to much). Montas is gonna be good I think

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 07:27 PM) Not a great comparison IMO. Left-handed pitching is always in demand and a guy like Jennings should have some value despite mediocre peripherals. It won't be in great demand if he goes out and pitches the same way he did last year but puts up an ERA close to the mid-4s like he probably should have. Also although he performs better against lefties he's not exactly a lefty-killer, so he has limited value as a LOOGY.

Dan Jennings is not worth near what some posters seem to think he is. Nice ERA but extremely meh peripherals. The market no longer rewards relievers like that. It's why Matt Albers only cost the Sox $2m last year coming off a 1.21 ERA.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 11:00 AM) Never had an OPS over .800, didn't have a higher OPS than Melky last year. So a few nice throws from RF made him one of the best 20 players in baseball? Not buying it at all. Sox should've sold high on him rebuilding or not and glad they got what they did. This is about the time where we get our daily rumor that leads to rampant excitement and eventually dies off around 2 or 3 PM as the reality of not trading Quintana for yet another day sinks in. Just get this over with for gods sakes. OPS isn't a great stat, because OBP is about 3x as important as SLG for scoring runs. Eaton was consistently 15-20% better than league average offensively.

Bob Nightengale ‏@BNightengale The #Titanic has sunk. No word on number of deaths yet.

QUOTE (Saufley @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 03:50 PM) If so, does Meadows HAVE to be the centerpiece? For me, I'd try everything to get him included. I absolutely love him as a prospect. I could do without him but it would take a lot. Something like Glasnow, Newman, Keller and Kingham.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 03:37 PM) I've enjoyed reading Yankees fans the last two weeks. I want Quintana to the Pirates, not only because I like their prospects best but their fans seem to have properly grasped Q's value better than anyone else.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 03:15 PM) According to Keith Law, that return is more than a little light. Well obviously it depends what you think of the prospects, but Joe Musgrove put up insane K/BB rates in the minors and then performed at an almost Quintana-level in the MLB in 2016 (SIERA, my favourite peripheral stat for pitching had Musgrove at 3.99 and Quintana at 4.01 in 2016, not to say he's at his level but it wouldn't be outrageous to project him providing close enough Quintana's value going forward to make you uncomfortable trading him and 2 other valuable pieces). Kyle Tucker hit well in A-ball as a 19-year-old and then mashed .339/.435/.661 during a brief promotion to high-A. And Francis Martes had a FIP in the 2s at A, A+ and AA. Whatever about Keith Law, Rick Hahn reportedly thought it was fair. I can see it from both sides, but I wouldn't exactly call the Astros losers for not taking it.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 03:03 PM) Good for Houston. They can be content with losing. Can we not be bitter towards teams who decide not to give us what we're asking for? It's perfectly reasonable to decide not to give Francis Martes, Kyle Tucker and Joe Musgrove for Jose Quintana.

Given the seller's market that it seems to be at the moment, I'd be reluctant to package players unless one was a deal-breaker for a prospect we loved. Seems to me that maximum value will be extracted from trading players individually.

QUOTE (ecupittfan @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:41 PM) What contending team is going to give up any decent prospect for Gardner or Headley? They have little value at that salary for the next 2 years. Its 2 average aging players on bad contracts. You have to give them away to be rid of the contracts. The Padres took a ton of Shields salary to get rid of him, if the Yanks just get rid of those guys and have to pay nothing they are happy. You are not going to send them to a bad team and get something in return as they have no use for them and don't want to give up prospects. I'm not saying they'd necessarily get much of value, probably lottery tickets, but the point is that they don't have negative value - as is being implied when people propose the Sox take them and get extra Yankees prospects.

QUOTE (ecupittfan @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:27 PM) The point is you are doing the yanks a favor by taking on the contract and saving them a ton of money and getting rid of guys who are on the downside of their career and blocking playing time for their young players. It is exactly what the White Sox should use in negotiations. The negotiations are more than the value of the player on the field. You really think they could get anything from anyone for those guys? You are taking on guys nobody wants to sweeten the deal for the Yanks. Glad some of you aren't negotiating for us. Not really. As I said, it doesn't really count as doing them a favour when they could just do it to another team and probably get something back for it rather than give something away.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:16 PM) I really doubt the Yankees adding another stud prospect would be determined by taking back Headley or Gardner. I can see taking back Headley or Gardner to make the deal work being a requirement, but it wouldn't be the the difference between acquiring Torres or Frazier and Torres and Frazier. Right, they were worth 2.6 (Headley) and 2.4 WAR (Gardner) last year and are owed $26m/2 years, and $23m/2 years respectively, if they really wanted to give them away they wouldn't have to include a top prospect to do so.

If we're talking catchers as add-ons in a Quintana deal, I'd love Garrett Stubbs of the Astros. Hit .325/.401/.517 at AA last year, following up a 291/.385/.442 showing at A+, and draws rave reviews for his defence. And he's not ranked highly enough that he figures to be a deal-breaker (#30 Astros prospect mlb.com, #23 astrosfuture.com, #18 crawfishboxes.com). Fangraphs' KATOH model of projecting WAR for prospects based on their minor league stats has him as the #53 prospect in baseball, and that wouldn't include framing.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Dec 23, 2016 -> 11:10 PM) 100 at bats dude. Sure, but his AA record was more good than great as well. His statline looks more Basabe than it does Meadows.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Dec 23, 2016 -> 08:45 PM) That seems more realistic for the Yankees and Pirates to me. But what do I know? ( poop ) There's no way I'm dealing Q and Jones for that package, Jones is very valuable on his own. I think I like Frazier least out of all the proposed headliners I've seen. Hasn't graded very well defensively and hit just .228/.278/.396 in AAA, albeit at a young age.

Unsure what effect it ultimately has on a front office, but in comparison to say, the Astros, Pirates fans seem really keen to acquire Quintana and their hypothetical trade proposals are largely very sensible.