username

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 11:50 AM) I have a feeling that something will happen soon. Agreed. Nightengale did a podcast with Buster Olney on Friday and said he'd be shocked if Quintana is "on the Sox in a week" (so this Friday/the 16th). As we all know he's pretty plugged in with the front office, so I think something happens soon. The recent news out of Houston also feels like posturing - i.e. our asking price being too high, as well as interest in Duffy.

QUOTE (Jake @ Dec 10, 2016 -> 12:19 PM) Something I think is encouraging about Anderson is it looks to me that while he has very bad plate discipline, I think his pitch recognition isn't bad. Some players are undisciplined but also have bad pitch recognition, which is very tough to teach. I think Avisail Garcia is a player who has bad pitch recognition, so even when he has a good plan at the plate he may end up swinging at bad pitches because he failed to realize what it was he was swinging at. With Anderson, even when he flails at a slider, he often looks to me like he knew it from the start but just couldn't stop himself from pulling the trigger. If I'm right, it won't take an amazing feat of coaching to get his strikeout rate down. Totally agreed. Numbers can tell part of the story, but he just looked different up there than free swingers like Avi. Very rarely did he look helpless against even tough pitches, and some of his tough takes late in the season really displayed improved pitch recognition.

I see what the author is looking at, and I'm usually a huge believer in batted ball stats. But I think the author is missing a few key things: 1) Anderson has ALWAYS been a guy people think will suffer regression. Take a look at his BABIP numbers for his entire career. Maybe it's time to just grasp that he's a bit different - and his 70+ speed and high exit velo's at least partially explain it. 2) He's extremely raw. At every level his BB rate has gone from horrific and improved until being passable. Give him some time. 3) The power. It was pretty clear by the eye test that Anderson has some real raw power lurking in there. Players don't come into the league with their power figured out often - look at Eaton of all people. If he can keep upping his ISO numbers he'll be totally fine even without walking enough. I really am a big believer in fangraphs, and the methods they use. But Anderson is simply a different cat. He's a quick study and has constantly defied the advanced metrics.

In terms of potential other teams/contenders for Q: I know the Dodgers supposedly aren't looking for pitching, but I have a hard time thinking they wouldn't be interested in a controlled, cost efficient guy like Q. Q also really fits what the Cubs are looking for (young, cost controlled). Probably unlikely, but they have the pieces to trade and the need. I still think the Nats could become interested at some point. Especially if Ross/Strasburg continue to have arm trouble. We may have cleaned them out of everyone of interest besides Robles though haha.

QUOTE (Swingandalongonetoleft @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 07:35 PM) Heard on the Score that Dexter Fowler is heading down to STL for a physical, fwiw. Wonder if: 1) Turner signs back with the Dodgers soon, since they were he only team I really heard seriously linked to him. 2) This affects the Rockies plans. They were supposedly talking Blackmon with the Cards, and I don't buy that Desmond is their 1B.

Signing Holland to take him off the market would be a sneaky good move. Force a team to take Robertson, and if Holland is back you have a crazy valuable asset at midseason. Highly doubt it happens though, I'm sure he'll get real $$.

I'm honestly more excited about Lopez than Giolito. That fastball is straight up filth. Ton of movement too.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 09:42 AM) And while I say that my ultimate hope is getting Brendan Rodgers for Q Love this idea ^. I think a huge Q and Abreu package makes so much sense for both teams. Rodgers and some of their other big prospects are totally blocked by that infield and outfield logjam. Plus Q with 4 cheap years of control is consistent with their window.

QUOTE (daa84 @ Dec 6, 2016 -> 05:16 PM) the other thing to consider is how insanely low our payroll is going to be in a year Yep. Should have an absurd amount of flexibility for that crazy 2018 FA class, could speed the rebuild up dramatically and not lose any young talent.

I'm higher on the Nats package than most, but this is good to hear. Makes me think there's still a legitimate chance someone jumps in, since sitting on your hands makes little sense otherwise. Though this does smell like posturing to an extent.

It looks like he deleted the other trade info too? Unless I'm an idiot and just can't find the post. Would seem to indicate the Sale thing might not be BS.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 6, 2016 -> 10:15 AM) The hard part to recreate is inciarte. When deal is done I'm optimistic deal will be hybrid of Miller/Hamels. Robles is about where Swanson was and Giolito better than any Jamel's received. Exactly. I know it's not a position player, but a valuable ML player like Ross would certainly elevate the Sale package well beyond the Miller package.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Dec 6, 2016 -> 09:29 AM) I think the Nationals package is better and it's not close. Giolito/Robles >>>> than Devers/Kopech. Totally agreed. Kopech has a way higher chance of ending up as a reliever, and Devers may not even stick at 3B. I also find the Robles hate amusing. People forget he's already at a higher level (A+ vs A ball) than Benitendi was last year, and he's only 19.

QUOTE (Ro Da Don @ Dec 6, 2016 -> 01:36 AM) We need pitchers too, who are you kidding. We have two good SP prospects in Hansen and Adams. 3 if you consider Fulmer a future SP. Yeah I don't get the myth that we have this elite rotation and stable of incoming pitchers. We actually have a huge black hole at 5th starter, and we're relying on Miggy Gonzalez to continue on a career year. If anything, a lack of starting depth has been nearly as detrimental to this team as a lack of position players. Last year was the same; Shark and Danks were flat out bad. You can win as a pitching focused team, and even win the World Series. But you're not a very good pitching team if you have 2-3 great pitchers and filler behind it.

Phil Rodgers just went on MLB network and said the Red Sox are interested in Sale and Robertson, and supposedly Moncada may not be totally untouchable. Felt a bit like speculation based on a few conversations that he's had, but it's encouraging nonetheless.

^ you just put your finger on the problem though. Swanson and Russel WERENT can't miss. They were minor leaguers at the time of those trades. Both teams took some measure of risk to make it happen.

This process is so painful. I get sticking to your guns but an empty Winter Meetings would be absolutely deflating as a fan.

I'm sick of the prospect fear, everyone is absurdly risk-averse. Of course Robles and Gioloto could bust. But you're going to get much more in addition to those guys. Maybe even some ML guys like Ross. The Nationals shouldn't give up Turner. If they do, it would be Turner plus a few lesser guys. The overall package would be light years smaller. And, even ML guys bust. Gordon Beckham would have looked pretty similar to Turner in his rookie season. For all we know Sale's arm could give out. The bottom line is this: 1) Chris Sale is gone in 3 years, and we aren't competing this year unless we somehow catch lightning in a bottle. 2) Our roster is painfully thin at a bunch of different positions. One impact player won't change that. 3) If we have to take too much pitching in a deal, so be it. You can turn that into position talent. 4) Would you trade Tim Anderson, plus 4-5 top prospects for an ace? Because that's basically what you're asking from the Nationals. Can we please stop this fear of losing Chris Sale induced tunnel vision, and look at the bigger picture? A large enough package of promising players doesn't need that one headliner to make sense.

Rizzo on MLB network now and just basically said Turner isn't untouchable. Before I get anyone's hopes up he also said they're planning on having him for the future... But he said something to the extent of "that's not to say there isn't a trade out there that would require him in a deal" Would still be shocked to see him traded but interesting nonetheless.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:35 AM) Mike, Giolito is the best pitching prospect in the minor leagues and is close to ML ready. Robles is #10 prospect in baseball according to MLB.com. He's the type guy that you acquire and is the #1 prospect in all of baseball in a year and a half. If the Sox can't develop Victor Robles, then they are screwed as an organization and doomed to fail anyway. Exactly. Robles was regarded more highly than Gary Sanchez this past year. Gioloto is a potential ace. There's inherently risk to rebuilding, you can't be so risk-averse that you handcuff yourself to proven commodities.

I think they'll ship out some excess pitching to make it happen. Ross in particular, plus Gio/Roark should net a good return in this market. Could be a 3-team deal for Sale even, Hahn loves those. They also might dangle Espinosa, with the same goal.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 1, 2016 -> 05:19 PM) Yeah what the poster above said, they would non-tender Espinosa and his projected $5.3 million and move Turner to short and use the money somewhere else. Yeah I think you guys are right...definitely makes a Turner trade slightly more feasible though. Espinosa is still a solid player, despite his offense really sucking as of late.

QUOTE (Carpe Diem @ Nov 30, 2016 -> 08:34 AM) The fact this smug, pompous, arrogant, goofy, AWFUL baseball careerist is STILL a powerful figure in within this orginization is the biggest slap in the face I have ever felt as a sports face. Worse than any Ron Turn offense or Mel Tucker defense. I won't completely rehash what has been said about how he struck gold in 2005 on career years from literally 85% of the roster and how he wasted money on aging DH's/OF's. Instead I want to very bluntly suggest to people who haven't already done so: Google the White Sox draft history during the Kenny Williams era. THIS ALONE SHOULD BE ENOUGH TO CAN HIS ASS! HE MAKES MATT MILLEN LOOK COMPETENT. And no I do not think he racially biased. Fire Kenny Williams shirts and posters are gonna be EVERYWHERE at the G-RATE. Watch. Please tell me this rant doesn't have anything to do with an impending Sox move.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 27, 2016 -> 02:32 PM) Devils advocate - that makes them less likely to trade for Sale as trading away a bunch of cheap talent across multiple positions is not a luxury they have now. They will not be able to use cash to plug in holes, are more reliant on their farm to produce than ever. That's a great point. I think the counter to that is the Dodgers don't want to waste Kershaw's prime - and their positions of need (3B and 2B) likely don't have talent ready to step in this year. They're basically in win-now mode but can't spend a ton. Edit: Plus once their top position prospects are likely to contribute meaningfully (2018-19 Bellinger, Calhoun, Verdugo) they'll be back to solid financial shape.

Dodgers apparently have to dramatically cut payroll this year due to MLB debt rules. Have to think that increases Sale's attractiveness - and potentially Frazier's (compared to Turner). Also makes me think Puig probably comes back in any deal - allowing the Dodgers to shed about $8-9 million each of the next two years.