Southwest Sider

QUOTE (AustinIllini @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 07:56 AM) Bowman was out negotiated by a better GM. I'm not like most Hawks fans who are Bowman apologists who think he is the most brilliant mind in the NHL. Even so, it's pretty clear what happened here. There was no "negotiation". There never should have been one, because the Hawks absolutely, positively had to unload Sharp. If a GM pays a dear price for a player that a team has literally zero choice but to trade, then they are an idiot, no matter how good the player. There was no leverage whatsoever for Bowman to even have negotiations. Jim Nill, credit where it's due, stuck to his guns. But that's what he should have done. That's what every other GM in the league should have done. Basically, they tell Stan Bowman "this is the deal, take it or leave it." Bowman can try to negotiate, but the counter to that is "Look, we know the position you are in and you have no leverage. You have no choice but to accept our (terrible) deal or violate the league salary cap". Knowing that, I give Jim Nill credit for actually being the GM that acquired Sharp, but beyond that I don't give him credit for shrewd negotiations because his play was so obvious that even someone like I could see that this was really the only way this could transpire.

Good team, good coach, I think Dallas has done a good job to become what they are now. We'll just have to see if they can keep it up through another 40+ games and an entire postseason. As for the Hawks, they just need to keep winning as many games as possible. This is one of those games when, in the moment, can feel incredibly disheartening to lose, but the season isn't even halfway over yet and a lot can change. Tip your cap and move on.

QUOTE (Frank_Thomas35 @ Dec 22, 2015 -> 11:11 AM) I personally am not worried about Laroche I think he bounces back big time this year. If you add Upton or Cespedes his bat continues to slide down in the order and the less we rely on him. I'm okay with Laroche on this team, if we have the money to sign one of these guys, I think the line up is better with one of the big three PLUS Laroache. I agree with this. Hell, even Adam Dunn bounced back nicely in his 2nd season with us. If Laroche really is LaDunn, as some have so affectionately referred to him as, then I expect he will be much closer to his career norms next season.

I agree that the Sox would have to win at least 2 or 3 more championships to steal the city... INCLUDING beating the Cubs in the World Series. And that would still only give them a chance of 50/50 in the immediate term. At that point, the diehard Cubs fans would never switch, so they would still have a massive fanbase, but most casuals would be onboard and a new generation of Chicago baseball fans might turn to the Sox because they are winners. If the Cubs fall back into mediocrity and the Sox win a few more championships over the course of a couple decades, then the tide would start turning in the Sox favor with older generations of Cubs fans dying off and new generations choosing the Sox because of their winning ways. /dreamland. Thinking of this does remind me how crucial of a point this is for the White Sox franchise. The goal right now is to not only get to the World Series, but defeat the Cubs in it because there is a good chance they will be there. Knowing this, it really behooves the Sox to spend more now to get the best possible team in the field to give yourself the best chance of denying the Cubs a title...

Eventually these free agents are going to have to realize that teams are not bidding up for their services. There's just not enough suitors. Makes me laugh at the Cubs a little bit for splurging so much on Heyward. They might have thought they were setting the market, but at this point it's probably going to look like a huge overpayment.

Good movie. Did anyone else feel like they were watching Wall-E during some of those BB-8 scenes?

QUOTE (CWSpalehoseCWS @ Dec 17, 2015 -> 10:30 PM) If the Sox got Upton/Cespedes, I would send Avi to Charlotte to start the year. He doesn't really have any value at the moment. Who knows, maybe he kills it and rebuilds some trade value allowing the Sox to flip him for someone. Avi in AAA is great for the Sox OF depth chart. He won't like it, but he needs to work on his craft, and it is better for that to be done in the minors. He's young enough still.

The OF that we might sign brings another interesting element to this. Whether it is Upton or Cespedes, there is likely a chance that there is an opt-out after year 3. This could make said player more marketable to teams in trade proposals, further adding to our depth of players we could deal to reload. Of course, there is also the angle that you add an Upton or Cespedes for them to be a part of the "core". But if they have good seasons, they will opt-out anyway, so you cannot bank on that.

I just realized that I pretty much posted the same thing twice in 2 paragraphs. That's what I get for starting a post and then finishing it a couple of hours later.

Driving around a bit earlier, listening to 1000 and 670 discuss the trade. The guys on 670 couldn't wrap their minds around this direction. The "going for it" direction. Trading prospects for MLB players. Their argument is that it probably only adds 2-5 wins to a team that only won 76 games. That is possibly true. Even if they add a big-name outfielder, will they have added enough wins? Maybe not! Then what was this exercise good for? Why did the Sox go for it instead of cashing in on assets? It feels like the Sox, in the position they are in, have to go for it. Hahn has repeatedly said that they want to win a championship WITH Sale and Abreu, instead of selling them off. It only makes sense to go for it, while they are here, while they are good. Build the best team you can without completely dismantling the farm. But if our worst fear comes true, that the Sox yet again have another season of mediocrity, will there still be that feeling of being pigeonholed into attempting to contend? If the Sox add an OF, their roster will look pretty set for at least the next 2 years, short stop and catcher aside. After this season, they could move Melky to DH and replace him with Avi(if he gets good) or another OF. They could also attempt to bolster short stop should Saladino prove not good enough, as well as be on the prowl for another upgrade at catcher. Or they could finally decide to go in the other direction. Why? Because it won't be too late. In the shoes of Rick Hahn, it would be incredibly difficult to ignore the following assets and what they might be able to retrieve you via trade: Melky (1 year left) Robertson (2 years left) Duke (1 year left) Frazier (1 year left) Lawrie (1 year left) Admittedly, since you cannot expect all 5 of those players to be at their maximum possible value by the end of next season, this group probably wouldn't bring in more then 1 or 2 blue chip prospects, along with lots of lottery tickets and decent to good prospects. That would be a pretty nice farm reload, all while still leaving the front office the option of either keeping Sale/Quintana/Abreu/Eaton, or selling them off and really going for a rebuild. You could try to trade any number of them and acquire some big-time prospects and MLB ready players. You could also trade none of them and still try to build around them, given their friendly contracts. But trading at least Sale and Quintana might not be a terrible idea. If the Sox are savvy enough, and with enough luck, you could have a bunch of new young players taking their lumps in 2017 with a rotation headlined by Rodon, Fulmer and Adams, and by the time the '17 and especially the '18 off season rolls around, potentially be in a good enough spot to where you could add a few key free agents to a budding club. The point of this post is to illustrate that the Sox, while committed to winning now, are not so committed to winning now that the future is completely jeopardized. I hope I have shown that with the possibilities that the future could hold for the franchise.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 04:26 PM) 4/100 gets a deal done with any of the remaining outfielders, imo. The per year on that is enough to entice any of them to sign, imo. I think the more likely deal is a longer deal with an out at year 3 or 4. That's true. That is what I was thinking, for the most part. Not enough years.

Frank said he'd pay him 4/100. I'm sitting there thinking Frank... that's not enough...

Probably just a coincidence, a few days ago my ticket guy left me a voice mail. Today, not 5 minutes ago, he left me another. Casting lines for STHs in order to pay for one of the big OFs?

I think that a lot of people share their initial reactions before allowing some time to think about it and let other posts influence how they feel. I learned about the trade about an hour after it happened, and as I read the initial posts my feeling was that "I hope we didn't just trade all 3 of those guys for just Frazier..." As a fan, I was excited to see if TT could stick in our outfield, and to see if Montas could help the back end of our bullpen. Micah Johnson I wasn't excited about. Losing those "exciting" things hurts, initially. And then, add the idea that worries me along with several other posters, that Frazier will struggle in the AL, and right away it seems like we paid too much. I was about ready to post as such. But I kept reading the thread and thoughts others have shared. The fact that we didn't have to trade Anderson or Fulmer. The significant detractors of the 3 prospects we traded. Frazier is a power hitter that this lineup desperately needs while also being above average defensively. Initially, I was kind of upset, but with most trades that happen, after the initial feelings a general contentedness settles in and I feel better. However, I absolutely agree that if you want to contend, you need to upgrade RF or LF, or both. Avi carries considerable risk as a starting OF for us. Our team is going to be much better off with Avi in AAA being a depth piece for us should one of our starting OFs get injured.

That was quick.

At this point, I'd rather keep Laroche. Like others have said, he is the perfect bounce back candidate, and if he does in fact bounce back, will be much more attractive to teams during the season. I just hope the Sox plans this offseason aren't contingent on moving Laroche. That would be terrible.

QUOTE (LDF @ Dec 10, 2015 -> 04:57 AM) i have one flaw in your post, a major flaw. if the sox haven't been able to trade the bolded, what make you think they can do it after the asg??? I meant to say the trade deadline, dunno what I was thinking there. Of course, it is contingent on the fact that they are actually playing decently. And, if that's happening, there's a good chance the Sox are winning games. So it is very unlikely those guys get dealt, but still possible under the right circumstance.

I can definitely see the idea of the Sox being big-time sellers if they don't have a good year. Could be as early as the all star break (Danks and Laroche) Next offseason, you would have Melky, Duke and Lawrie available with only 1 year left, and Robertson with a 2 year contract. Besides a Robertson who continues being great, none would command a haul. But all of them would together would inject a sizable sum of talent into the system. And then you have the weak free agent starting pitching class to try and exploit with Quintana and/or Sale. Not the worst position to be in should your team flop in 2016.

This is a fantastic deal, I'm really surprised that there wan't a better offer out there! The A's must really have wanted to unload him, unfortunately for them with only 1 (maybe 2?) suitors. I'll enjoy a modest 3B upgrade with the potential for it to be an insane 3B upgrade. I'm now rooting for Lawrie to really break out. He seems to have a passion for the game, so that is a good start.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 11:12 AM) Robin was also on MLB network the other day and said Olt may get a shot at third. What is said in the media really means very little. While it is inconceivable on the surface to even fathom Olt getting a shot at 3rd, if a trade like this doesn't go down, then that's what we are looking at. All things being equal, Trayce getting a shot at CF is far likelier to happen then Olt getting a shot at 3rd base.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 11:08 AM) I think the sox may keep trayce, but that sounds like classic use of media to try and hype up a player for trade. I was considering that angle as well, but it just doesn't seem to make much sense in relation to this trade. Maybe others. Going out there and telling the media that Trayce is going to compete for CF just doesn't seem like a way to increase his value. His value is already as high as it has ever been, in my opinion. Teams have tape on him, they probably all have some kind of scouting report on him. Other teams are too smart to let what the White Sox say dictate the value that they originally placed on a player such as Trayce.

To anyone worried about losing Trayce: Not 24 hours ago articles came out saying he was going to be given a shot at CF in ST. Obviously, this doesn't completely preclude the Sox from dealing him. Nonetheless, I doubt that the Sox would deal him after not being too far removed from comments like that. I'm pretty happy about that, too. I'd like our organization to be the first to see if Trayce can make the adjustments required to be a good major leaguer. I'm not ready to trade him, at this point.

QUOTE (Frank_Thomas35 @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 10:33 AM) I see this impediment more as a sign the follow up moves to this are either falling through or not as progressing as fast as they anticipated when this leaked late last night. I think we see a few moves quickly. And I still think this is part of the plan Sox just don't want to announce it yet. And we aren't giving up Trayce for him either Agreed, this sounds like the Sox are still lining up another domino or two.

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 11:58 PM) He is 26 and better then any other option we currently have, right? Trading for a 3rd basemen from the A's was a really good idea, last year. This year it is still a good idea, but Brett Lawrie isn't that great. He has the potential, no doubt, but he isn't great. That should be a significant detractor to his value. His youth, however, and relatively healthy season still gives him value. I just don't think I'd agree with sending any of our top prospects OR Erik Johnson for him... But if the Sox are dealing from a position of 'desperation' or 'we need this guy', then they are probably going to lose this trade. If they are acting out of a position of acknowledging his value, but aren't terribly motivated to make a deal, then they could win this trade or at worst, have it be a lateral move. This trade, if it goes down, will tell me a lot about who is really running this team.

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 11:50 PM) How would people feel about an Avi-Lawrie swap? I assume good I really hope this is the case.