OmarComing25

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Jan 22, 2017 -> 11:51 PM) Umm nope. Then there is Verlander and Carrasco who have had injuries and I'm not sure I would rather have them Putting Fulmer in the top 20 is also pretty generous. Outside of ERA there was nothing that impressive about his numbers.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 22, 2017 -> 10:30 PM) No way you can say Q is a top 10 pitcher in MLB unless you are just an all out slave to WAR. Nothing against him, but he's not that guy. Top 20 is a bit of a different story, I think I could come up with 20 pitchers I'd rather have in 2017 tbh. Ok I'll bite, name 20.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 02:05 PM) They have Altuve, Correa and Springer. The rest really aren't that enthusing. The rest will all likely have wRC+ in the range of 105-110 if not more (with the exceptions of Gurriel and McCann probably being in the 95-100 range). Even if you're not that enthused about the rest, there aren't really any weak spots either.

I don't know, as much as I want the Astros to get desperate enough to get a deal done for Q, I feel like that kind of bias is leading posters here to underrate them. Their rotation is suspect and they could definitely use Quintana, but their offense and bullpen should be near the top of the AL. The Royals' rotation is even more suspect and this will probably be their weakest bullpen in years (I'd probably put it in the bottom half of the league at this point). The Tigers are still relying on a bunch of mid-30s players and have plenty of rotation concerns themselves. The Rangers' rotation is very top heavy and even with their top 2 Darvish has health concerns and Hamels is a year older after seeing his walk rate go up significantly. I also think their offense is pretty overrated. Seattle looks interesting but I still think they have more question marks than Houston does. I just don't see why any of these teams should be favored ahead of the Astros right now.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 02:41 PM) Buehrle far and away I think. I don't think he'll get in but he does have an argument. Bill James has said that 60 WAR is kind of the threshold to reach to have a legit shot. Buehrle is sitting at 51.9 fWAR. The 214 wins is a little low for most voters (I understand wins are a pretty garbage stat for pitchers but voters still look at it) and the ERA is a little high. He does have a 117 ERA+ though that does compare favorably to many Hall of Famers and bests quite a few. He also has a few of the key moment type things voters take note of like the perfect game and no hitter, the only guy to face the minimum 27 batters 3 times, once held the batters retired streak record, the remarkable durability and the streak of 10 win, 200 IP seasons. If I were a voter for homerism might cause me to vote for Buehrle. Looking at completely objectively he falls a bit short. Had he not retired early he could have made a run at 300 wins and would have a much better case but alas that did not happen. Buehrle does have 59.2 bWAR, which I think reflects his career better than fWAR because with his defense and ability to hold runners he was able to consistently outperform his FIP. I don't think he quite deserves it (one of the leaders of the Hall of Very Good though) but he's closer than a lot might think, far closer than Konerko anyway.

I think we would easily be #1 after a Quintana trade.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 03:43 PM) So I think there is a reasonable counterfactual that Sale's return may have diminished if you factor in knowledge of continued elevated performance of Turner/Bregman/Benintendi/Swanson and a wild card like Gary Sanchez. The great timing about last year included the 2015 draft featuring teams like the Astros and Red Sox in the top ten selecting good college hitters when they both expected playoff contention the next year. We got Moncada, and that's amazing. You don't see 70 scored prospects moved much. So I'm happy as hell. For instance, Dave Cameron yesterday said if Otani came over today he'd still be rated behind Moncada. But I do think packages like Giolito/Turner or Moncada/Benintendi would have been more likely than this offseason when those players had played their way in. The Astros, of course, may have always valued Bregman this high. So I guess if you really like some of these headliners like Albies/Tucker/Meadows/etc, then you should get them while they may be attainable. But if you think this crop isn't crazy and would rather follow a fast riser in July, I guess go do that. But a lot of top ten prospects happened to be on contending teams as surplus, it was an interesting time that probably closed for a bit. I think it was Eric Longenhagen who said that, and he is Fangraphs main prospect guy, so coming from him that makes it even better.

Fangraphs currently has the White Sox projected at third worst, 1.3 WAR ahead of the Brewers and 2.3 WAR ahead of the Padres. Trading Q and Frazier would easily put us as the worst, though I would probably agree with others that the Padres projection might be too rosy, they're going to be really bad. The hope is that the NL is bad enough that the Padres will pick up a few extra wins, while the AL is tough enough that we'll pick up a few extra losses.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 10, 2017 -> 09:28 AM) I think Tanaka gets dealt in June/July for prospects (if he is healthy and doing good) and then they try to bring him back next off-season. I think the Yankees are going to be in the hunt all year so I don't see this happening.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 02:02 PM) The pirates window is closing? We talking about the team we are crying about to include their two top hitting prospects in addition to their 2 top 50 pitching prospects and have the best outfield in baseball? This doesn't really detract from your point but the best outfield in baseball is clearly the Angels' outfield.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 09:57 AM) The last time the White Sox ranked top 5 in pitching in the AL was 2005. Is this just using ERA? Because in 2009 the Sox were 2nd in the AL in ERA. But the Sox are first in pitching WAR from 2005-2016 (still first by more than 10 WAR even excluding 2005). The real problem is that they're dead last by a lot (and it's embarrassing how much worse it has been than the other teams, the gap is that big) in defense in the AL since 2005, which of course has made the pitching look a lot worse than it has been.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Jan 7, 2017 -> 10:13 PM) It's not about prospect value this year, it's about giving their highly coveted youth another year to develop and potentially fill holes between now and next winter. It's a moot point since the Astros are going for it anyway, it's just a year early imo. Why is it a year early? The general consensus is that they are the favorites to win the West. And I can't say I disagree, they have flaws but their division rivals have more.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 06:27 PM) I'm not certain Meadows is off limits. Bregman I agree on, but until the Pirates move McCutchen I think Meadows is still a possibility even if it's a remote one. I agree and honestly I'd rather have Meadows than Bregman.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Dec 31, 2016 -> 12:08 PM) And the Sox may have waited a bit too long to be reasonable in a Sale trade. We'll never know for certain but I think the Sox could've landed Benintendi + Moncada if they weren't so busy being hardheaded about the Red Sox meeting their price with Mookie Betts. Perhaps a lesson they should learn with Quintana. I don't think there was any chance at all both Benintendi and Moncada would have been in play no matter how well the Sox negotiated. I think we did about as well as we could have with Sale.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 30, 2016 -> 09:27 AM) On the subject of stormtroopers, what's the point of their armor when it doesn't stop anything? Maybe the helmets are why they miss most of their shots lol The blasters in Star Wars are able to obliterate concrete and create huge craters in metal surfaces, I don't think there's much armor that can protect against that. And are we sure they're always killed when hit? Maybe they're just stunned or knocked out.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 30, 2016 -> 11:01 AM) I keep going back to the fact that he is worth more to the Sox than other teams because of the way others view him. The Sox won't trade him for less than a #1 is worth and others don't view him that way, thus no trade. I'm not really worried about this because if other GMs don't know how good Quintana is then they wouldn't be very good at their jobs. We're not talking about the casual fan here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 09:51 PM) 2.3 fWAR last year for Gyorko, 2.4 fWAR for Frazier. Yes, Frazier is a slight upgrade. Would you take on $10 million and give up a top 100 prospect for that upgrade, even if you think that Frazier's value is being underestimated or he got extra unluckly last year? Honestly, no you wouldn't. You might think about trading for him at the deadline if Gyorko fell apart, but you'd also have Moustakas as an option potentially and you've been after athleticism and defense, which Frazier doesn't provide compared to him, and you're not giving up a top 100 prospect for Frazier unless he's back to all star form at that time. Sure but I don't buy Gyorko doing that again, and the projections don't either (Frazier is projected to be ~2 WAR better). You can't just assume Gyorko is going to repeat that. 2015 Frazier was nearly 4 wins better than 2015 Gyorko. 2014 Frazier was nearly 5 WAR better than 2014 Gyorko.

Frazier makes a lot of sense for the Cardinals. Peralta sucks now and Gyorko is pretty bad too.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 04:45 PM) 4.60 ERA for the starting rotation 3.77 for relivers 21st in the mlb overall middle of the pack offense Zero prospect depth. Things are likely going to get worse before they get better though Rotation is projected for a 3.85 ERA in 2017, and going through the projections by pitcher I don't really find any I disagree with. Richards/Shoemaker/Skaggs/Nolasco/Chavez/Meyer isn't a great rotation, but it's far from a mess.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 02:27 PM) I see each of those teams in declinem likely forcing a rebuild within the next few seasons Right, and I'm saying all of them are roughly on the Angels' level right now, and the Angels will have the money to add in the next two offseasons. A playoff spot is going to come from one or more teams of that group, and I could easily see it being the Angels. They're not in a great position, but it's not nearly bad enough that they should punt on one of the best players of all time for a handful of prospects.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 02:24 PM) Being roughly .500, with an awful farm system is not a good place to be. See "White Sox last decade" (minus Trout) But that also describes Detroit, KC, Baltimore and Seattle. And Toronto and Texas are only in slightly better positions.

Are they really that far from contending either way? Two years ago they missed the playoffs by one game. And I'm not so sure the AL is going to be as strong this year (which worries me about our chances at the #1 pick). The Rangers are going to regress hard (they played like a .500 team that got extraordinarily lucky this year and I'm not really that impressed with their current roster), and while Boston, Cleveland and Houston look like clear division favorites Texas/Seattle/Detroit/KC/Baltimore/Toronto/NYY are roughly .500ish teams and I'd put the Angels about on that level as well. Even this season their run differential was just -10, and they were hit hard by injuries.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 01:53 PM) The problem is their farm is awful, like worst system in the mlb awful. Their pitching is ugly, and what tradeable pieces outside of Trout do they really have? Fangraphs actually has them currently projected as 5th in the AL just behind the Yankees. Their bullpen is nothing special but I think their rotation will actually be OK if they don't get hit too hard with the injury bug again. I think they'll be better than many think this year, a Wildcard isn't out of the question if a couple things go right, and they'll have money to spend in the next two offseasons. I don't think blowing it up is the right move. I don't really see getting a big boatload of prospects for Trout as improving their situation. I highly doubt their combined value would surpass Trout's unless they got really lucky.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 01:38 PM) With only two seasons of control? Give me the cheap prospect package for what the White Sox need right now Absolutely. Two seasons of Trout would get us a way better package than 4 seasons of Quintana right now.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 01:30 PM) Pure entertainment: Would you trade (you personally) Quintana to Angels for the rights to Mike Trout for his 2019 and 2020 seasons? That's it! Four years of Q for two years of Mike Trout. Trout and Quintana would be on same team for two seasons. I would. If things go very wrong in the next couple of years we could still trade Trout for a huge haul.