ChiSox59

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 01:41 PM) The White Sox need to acquire as much talent as is possible. I used this example previously - if a team offers three 60 FV pitchers or three 55 FV bats, you take the pitchers in a heart beat because it is a more valuable package. The White Sox are 2-3 years away from competing as is. Collect all the talent you can. I get that, and I don't disagree, but the Sox badly need hitting prospects. I am all for acquiring and hording as many top prospects as we can. That said, it is obvious that there is a premium on hitting prospects, so I don't think it is as simple as "oh well, we'll just turn Glasnow into a top 5 positional player down the line".

QUOTE (flavum @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 01:25 PM) Spencer Adams Aaron Bummer Zack Burdi Brian Clark Zack Collins Nicky Delmonico Jace Fry Courtney Hawkins Danny Hayes Michael Kopech Matt Purke Aaron Bummer is new name for me. I wouldn't consider myself a minor league expert, but I follow boxscores and the Sox top prospects, and not sure I've even seen that name before.

QUOTE (reiks12 @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 01:10 PM) Who cares about bats right now? We have the draft and an excess of pitching prospects to acquire bats. We also have 3 high draft picks before our competitive window and free agency to help out. Giolito Glasnow Kopech Lopez Keller Fulmer Hansen Burdi Rodon Jones Dunning Find who is expendable and get those bats. Orrrrrr don't waste your your last great bullet on pitching, and get a legit bat. Better to have it now than trade for it later, IMO. That said, if the offers don't materialize and we can land Glasnow, Keller, Newman ++, I guess it is what it is. Its not like I dislike Glasnow and Newman, I just want the main piece to be a bat. If Q can't land a top 10 positional player prospect, not sure how you can assume Glasnow or Keller can at a later date.

QUOTE (reiks12 @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 12:56 PM) I actually really like the idea of Glasnow/Keller/Newman/ and Diaz I dont find it light at all Itd be a solid deal if we hadn't just acquired 4 legit pithing prospects in our last 2 deals. We need bats. Meadows + Glasnow or Keller + Newman + Diaz is much better move for the Sox.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 11:34 AM) Why would anyone even argue? Unless you know exactly what has been turned down, you have nothing to argue about. As far as I can tell, not one poster here has any idea what the White Sox have said no to yet. But there are huge problems. It's ridiculous. It is really just a couple posters, and one in particular.

Honestly have no idea. My guess is not pretty. .201/.260/.310. Maybe 250 ABs.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 22, 2017 -> 04:51 PM) There are have been two reports about specific packages being talked about with Houston I am not pulling anything out of thin air. Again, you're assuming pieces 4 and 5 in the rumored Martes + Tucker + Paulino ++ trade are meaningful pieces. You're also assuming that the Astros value Archer and Q the same, when in fact we've heard that the Astros declined a similar but arguably less impressive package in Martes+Musgrove + Tucker for Q (especially if pieces 4 and 5 in the Archer package are significant pieces like Fischer and Reed - another assumption you've previously made). So, yes, you are making major assumiptions that have very little validity.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 22, 2017 -> 03:45 PM) I can reasonably assume that the Sox have been offered a similar deal that the Rays were sent for Archer and that the Sox are leaving it on the table because they want Musgrove or Bregman. Not taking much of a leap on that, and I think that's a good deal that makes the Sox better long term. Also if they had been shopping Sale for a year I would hope they have also had talks on Quintana. This FO can do more than one thing at a time. You say you won't make assumptions, and then you make enormous assumptions. Shocking.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 22, 2017 -> 01:36 PM) Why is Hahn excused for settling on Sale (a superior player to Q btw) deal that was more realistic when he won't do the same for Quintana? He got the best prospect in the game, plus an arguably top 5 pitching prospect. Plus a super interesting lottery ticket OF. I think a lot here thought the offer was one player light, and I obviously would have loved Devers, but hard to call it settling. Nowhere near the same as settling for an offer like Tucker + Martes + Fischer type package. So much less interesting at the top. A comparable package from the Astros would be Bregman + Martes + Fischer + some back end top 20 lottery ticket Sox like. We obviously aren't getting that.

NM.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 22, 2017 -> 10:02 AM) Holy s***, him and Andy Marte in one night? Sounds like it was same crash, so I assume they were probably together. Seems like a stretch that it was randomly two baseball players. I am sure we will learn.

Wow, that is horrible.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 07:04 PM) Quintana had just as good a second half from an ERA standpoint. Nobody is really making any sort of convincing argument that Archer should be worth more than Quintana. The $2m AAV is pretty much meaningless and the 5th extra year of control could just as easily be a blessing or a curse. Quintana is the better pitcher and he's a lefty. He's the guy the Astros should and probably would rather have. The original argument was the Astros could "easily" view Archer and Quintana as equals, I think that idea is far fetched to say the least. His last two years, just like Quintana, are team options. So there certainly won't be any curses.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 03:37 PM) Seems like there is a 1% chance of Archer getting traded I think the Rays would require a Turner / Bregman / Swanson / Benintendi / Moncada level prospect to even go beyond initial discussions Ageeed completely. Was debating the rumored Astros package for Archer does not mean they'll turn and off that for Quintana, Plus's add Reed and Fischer as the +2.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 03:28 PM) Melky had a very good year last year. I am not sure why he didn't get moved yet, but I think there is a decent chance his value drops. Hopefully he puts up good numbers the first half and has value at the deadline but he is 32 and we could also see a decline as well. He is due $15M. That's the problem. He'll be much easier to move next summer.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 03:04 PM) Yea I dont know if that was "misspeaking". Great response.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 02:41 PM) ? Yah, I misspoke there on the age. But the point still remains.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 02:23 PM) OK dont get mad were talking about baseball. Calm. 1. I would say Paulino + 2 (not necessarily lottery tickets btw) is about equal to Reed and Fisher. Paulino is the Astros consensus third best prospect, him plus two guys is probably worth about what Reed after a down year and lower-ranked Fisher are combined. Fair comparison I think, no too off base. 2. Quintana has (a) better numbers (b) throws left handed © better injury history and (d) never had a major league ERA over 4. All of that is not outdone by Archer's sexier fastball or chump-change $2m AAV or year of extra control in 2022. And when specific packages get reported by the media yes I can take some liberties with what I assume is on the table. If the Astros were willing to give up what they apparently offered Tampa they are likely coming to the White Sox with similar offers, that makes sense. There's nothing controversial about that. 3. Quintana is probably worth more than Adam Eaton also and no way does Tucker, Reed, Martes and Fisher beat the Sale deal. 4. Moncada >>> Tucker Kopech >> Martes Basabe = Diaz I am plenty calm. Just sick of reading your same BS over and over and over again. #1) This is complete and total conjecture. Reed is no longer a prospect, but if he were, he would be in their top 3. This guy was the #2 prospect behind Bregman 12 months ago and a top 20 guy in the whole game. Sure, he had a brutal cup of coffee in the majors, but his value is not nearly as far in the s***ter as you make it out to be. And again - you're making the giant leaps of assumption. "Paulino + 2 is about equal to Reed and Fischer". How can you make that determination when you have zero clue what the +2 is? They could be 19 year old rookie ballers for all we know, and since the names weren't reported, it is far safer to assume they are closer to a throw in then a top 100 prospect. #2) An extra year of control is a pretty big deal. A year ago, someone would have laughed at you had you said Q was more valuable that Archer. Archer is cheaper, controlled longer, and a far more dominating pitcher (career K/9 of 9.3 vs. 7.4). These are meaningful facts. #3) I never said Tucker, Reed, Fischer, and Martes beats the Sale deal. I said it "rivals" the Sale deal, and beats the Eaton deal. #4) LOL. Moncada is a far better prospect than Tucker, but the rest of the deal after the centerpieces, I like this made up Astros package far better. Kopech is maybe a tad better prospect that Martes, but certainly not ">>". These guys were just ranked #4 and #5 respectively on the updated RHP top 10. Its close to a wash, and while Kopech maybe has a higher upside, Martes is a safer bet and closer to the bigs. After that, the Astros deal is far better on the last 2 pieces. Your Basabe = Reed comparison made me laugh. Thanks for that. And Fischer is a legitimate OF prospect and Diaz is a complete and utter lottery ticket.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 01:59 PM) "Absolutely nothing"? Not the fact that comparable deal for an inferior pitcher was turned down by the Rays? Might want to reconsider your words because to me there is strong indication that the Astros are willing to include almost any combination of minor league talent. The issue is Hahn is probably still pestering them over Musgrove and Bregman, because he apparently hasn't gotten the message that those guys aren't on the move. First of all - Martes+Tucker+Reed+Fischer does not equal Martes+Tucker+Paulino+ 2 absolute question marks. Paulino + 2 lottery ticket types doesn't equal Reed and Fischer. Second of all - how in god's green earth do you know how the Astros value Archer vs. Q? Archer, by the way, is controlled for an additional year at ~$2M less on AAV basis. I personally like Q more than Archer, but I am not an unbiased bystander, and until 2017, their numbers were pretty similar in the previous 3 seasons. I don't think it is too wildly farfetched to think that the Astros value Archer higher than Q, and maybe by a sizable margin. Let's not forget that Archer was the AL starter in the ASG in 2015, and to that point was widely considered one of the top RHP in the game. Furthermore, how about that rumored package that Houston turned down of Musgrove, Martes and Tucker? So they turn that down, but then replace Musgrove with Reed (a former top 20 prospect) and Tucker? C'mon man. You throw around way too many things like they're fact when you're just speculating. It is beyond annoying. Maybe RH is still trying to get Bregman - who knows? You certainly don't. So stop acting like its gospel. I think that a Martes, Tucker, Reed and Fischer package hasn't been offered, because if it had, those dudes would be White Sox. And why do I think that? Because on a player for player basis, that trade rivals the Sale deal and bests the Eaton deal, which actually happened and can be used as a legitimate basis for future deals (aka - fact).

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 01:43 PM) The leaked Tucker-Martes-Paulino + 2 prospects offer for Archer indicates that this kind of deal is probably possible. Perhaps the inclusion of Fisher and Reed would necessitate "lowering" Martes to Paulino or Perez (personally, I think both would be an improvement) but in any case, if the Sox wanted that deal I'm fairly certain they could get it. Regarding the bolded, there is absolutely nothing out there that backs up this logic.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 01:28 PM) I looked at an Astros board earlier and someone suggested Martes, Tucker, Fisher, and Reed. I'd probably do that. Something like this gets closer to making sense, but there is zero indications whatsoever that something like that is on the table.

Have to wonder why the Dodgers aren't at least a little interested in Lawrie. Obviously he is nothing special, but he's better than their internal options at the moment, and likely won't cost much to acquire.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 09:47 AM) Right now the Sox have a bad major league roster and a good-not-great farm that probably isn't good enough to elevate the major league team to success. They are doing a soft reboot, not an all out rebuild. Changing the topic for just a minute, I feel like if the Sox were going to go the bolded route, they would have actually signed some guys. They've let some pretty decent bats go off the market for dirt cheap. Colby Rasmus would have been nice on this team at $5M + incentives if they were planning to try to compete this year. The Sox would be mentioned more with the DH types on the market. They wouldn't be going into the season with Avi/Liriano at the top of the RF depth chart. They'd be looking at a guy like Hammel. At this point, I think its pretty obvious that the Sox are planning to let Melky and Frazier have a couple months to rake, move them for what they can, and then field a down to the studs starting lineup. That to me doesn't scream a team doing a half assed rebuild. Not trading Quintana prior to Feb 1 doesn't change that.

Does Alvarez have a legit shot at getting some ML PT this year?

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 10:37 AM) It wouldn't, but people are convinced that if the Sox dont get Mike Trout for Jose Quintana its a disaster. Aren't you Mr. Hyperbole!