ChiSox59

QUOTE (daggins @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 02:11 PM) Seems like too much, but in this market, who knows. I guess talks with the Rays about Colome have cooled. Too much? I don't think so at all.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 02:00 PM) Yeah cubs have a bit of an unknown with Fowler gone but get a big plus with Schwarber. They also lost the best closer in the game.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 11:28 AM) None of Houston's guys gets me real excited. I'd want 5-6 of them. Hope another team enters the fray. Same. Martes and Tucker are nice, but not sure you get much beyond that.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 11:14 AM) Q to Colorado is what I'm hoping for, though I haven't seen anything that suggested that the teams are seriously talking. Yah, Colorado makes the most sense on paper. Tons of guys I like there. Seems they may be easier to fleece than the Astros who appear to be going at this thing conservatively.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 11:15 AM) Yeah, Reed/Tucker/Fisher/Whitely for Q alone is alot to ask. I think offering Jennings or Putnam balances that out a bit. Perhaps, but it lets them keep both Martes and Musgrove, and doesn't really take much away from their 2017 season, outside of Reed who probably played himself out 2017 at bats with his 2016 season. I agree it is alot, and I'd be willing to add a Putnam or Jennings to the package to make it happen. But I want both Tucker and Fisher. Reed seems like a good fit and a nice buy low. I am fine with the 4th piece being an arm that is further away since we already have GIolito and Lopez ready to step in, Fulmer not too far behind them, and Kopech a year or so behind them. Whiteley makes sense in that regard.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 10:50 AM) I'll throw this out there for entertainment purposes only. Offer Q + Reliever ( Jennings or Putnam) for Reed, Fisher, Martes and Whitely. If that's close but Houston isn't quite satisfied then offer to take Singletons contract off their hands as part of the trade. Houston gets Q + one of Jennings/Putnam for Reed/Fisher/Martes/Whitley/Singleton. Is that close? Kinda feels like it still favors the Sox to a point Houston says no. Thoughts? I'd much rather go for bats. Only one of Martes/Musgrove/Whitely. I think Reed/Tucker/Fisher/Whitely makes sense. Maybe Hernandez is there somewhere and add a reliever.

QUOTE (Al Lopez's Ghost @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 10:01 AM) I agree with the general idea , but the new luxury tax rules are being phased in. For 2017, teams are penalized the avearage of the old rules and new rules. In 2018, the new rules take over. Also, I thought I saw that if Q is traded we will have something like $3 million committed in contracts in 2018, although with Shields I'm not sure how that can be true. SOX SALARY OBLIGATIONS Sox have $35M on the books for 2018, only $2.25M on the books for 2019 - which is only the buyouts in Shields, Q and Jones' contracts. Obviously pretty likely Q and Jones club options would be picked up.

QUOTE (soxfan49 @ Dec 10, 2016 -> 07:36 AM) Call me crazy but isn't this year about being absolutely f***ing terrible and finishing with the 1st pick? I'd rather see none of those guys. At worst, maybe for the last month of the year. I find this line of thinking comical. I was and remain all for the Sox rebuilding, and to this point, they've traded 2/3 of their most valuable assets. But let's not forget this team is owned by Jerry Reinsdorf and that the team has tried to win for the lionshare of the past 20 seasons. Yes, they've turned a page - and they needed to - but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to see the Sox hold onto Q, Abreu, Robertson, Frazier and Melky and actually field a half ways decent lineup. Maybe sign a Colby Rasmus and a Pedro Alvarez and still see what their record looks like in June. The chances that team is anywhere near .500 is slim, but crazier things have happened. If they suck, they can trade all those aforementioned players. If they're hanging around, they can insert a Moncada into the lineup; a Giolito and Lopez into the rotation and see where they are in the latter half of July. I don't expect this team to be any good next year, but I am still going to rooting for wins. I hope they go sign some guys to 1 year deals who could perhaps be turned into something next summer. That said, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see a few more trades that make 2017 looks much more bleak. Remove 1 or 2 of Melky, Abreu or Frazier and that lineup gets real ugly.

I don't see Cashman trading his farm for a guy he let go, if for nothing more than ego.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 9, 2016 -> 02:04 PM) I expect the rotation to be Rodon, Gonzalez, Shields, and 2 free agent fliers. I'm pretty confident after hearing Hahn that Fulmer, Lopez, and Giolito will all start at Charlotte. Charlotte will be fun to follow for the first few months.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 9, 2016 -> 01:06 PM) It is all about service time. As long as all of them spend longer in the minors than they were up last year their service time won't equal a full year, which means the Sox own them for another season. There are 183 days in a season. By CBA a seasons worth of service is 172 days or more on the major league roster. Just as an example, if Moncada had 30 days last year, if he serves less than 142 on the major league roster this year, he doesn't hit 172 and he won't have a full year's worth of credit. No idea how much time he actually spent on the roster, so the exact number could vary. If he ends with 170 days, that is less than a year, so the team maintains his rights for another full season. I am pretty confident the Sox will do this with Giolito, Lopez and Moncada. Hahn has already said all will start at AAA, so I think that is pretty clear.

QUOTE (shipps @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 04:09 PM) Saves and ERA isnt a bad thing to look at though, you just have much more to take into account as well. You guys are being jerks about it. Saves are pretty irrelevant. That has much more to do with how good of a team you're on. Save % is probably a better metric to look at. Saves, and ERA would definitely be factors, but not the main criteria is analyzing a closer. FIP, as has been mentioned probably is the best. K/9, WHIP, and BB/9 are pretty important for closers as well.

QUOTE (peppers312 @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 03:41 PM) pretty sure those are the first two stats i'm looking at if i need a closer bruh. This is cute.

The threads that have very little to do with the actual game of baseball being played are always dominated by DA.

QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 01:16 PM) Yeah, I have that same smidge of disappointment that what was supposed to an "unprecedented haul" ended up a tad smaller than hoped. One more significant piece like Devers could have offset that a little. Still in all, a good trade with a great headliner. I think the addition of Devers would have made it a grand slam.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 01:33 PM) The #Nats tried to get the #WhiteSox to include closer David Robertson in the Adam Eaton trade, but Sox refused, will deal separately. https://twitter.com/BNightengale/status/806942192245698560 RH is my hero.

QUOTE (soxforlife05 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 11:43 PM) Don't think you can equate Diaz/Basabe with Devers. Should have demanded Groome/Basabe or ERod Yah, I think this trade looks SOOO much better with ERod or Groome added on as the 3rd piece, Basabe the 4th, and Diaz the 5th. BUt oh well. Can't complain about the 1st two pieces.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 12:12 PM) I guess what I'm wondering is this though - how much do we value this marginal upgrade: Pena .235 .273 .376 .650 Severino .271 .316 .337 .653 I realize Severino has shown well in some ML games and Penas was between AA and AAA and the AA numbers were better. But, why use Robertson on that if Pena is supposedly SEverino's defensive equal? Is Pena supposed to be an elite defensive catcher?

QUOTE (peppers312 @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 12:19 PM) how about Robertson for Robles + Fedde? Robles was only available for Sale.

QUOTE (shipps @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 11:41 AM) Maybe the Giants are a fit for Frazier? http://www.knbr.com/2016/12/07/brisbee-gia...r-todd-frazier/ "Frazier is due $7.5M next year..." Too bad that's not accurate - his market would be quite a bit more robust.

QUOTE (DirtySox @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 11:11 AM) Bob Nightengale‏ @BNightengale The #Nats are in Jansen sweepstakes but now concede they may have to use trade market, and #Whitesox closer David Robertson intrigues them RH is the man. There is no way Rizzo didn't try to get Robertson in the deal. But he probably wouldn't do that without Robles. Stuck to his guns. Severino and one of Nuese/Stevenson/Ward/Banks should do.

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 10:53 AM) Jones should have really good value and I believe someone said as much (maybe Dave Cameron). Yep, Passan said as much about Jones in his column today as well.

Seems like an interesting piece to me. His sinker looks pretty filthy in the link Y2J shared above.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 08:59 AM) Robertsons value is difficult to figure out. But I would be happy to deal for Severino. But the Nationals catchers aren't very good with Ramos gone so maybe they are keeping him. Yah, was a bit surprised to not see him added to the Nats deal with Robertson going back. I think it signals that they either were still shooting for Chapman and Jansen and/or want to keep Severino. Like you said, they don't have much else.

QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 09:09 AM) The meetings end when the Rule 5 is completed. Travel day. Don't expect anything today, and maybe not until next week. Ya, generally don't see much action on day 4 after Rule 5.