With Sale's contract vs Trout, that is a severe overpay by the Sox.

Is it?

 

If you assume Trout is worth $70 million per season (Fangraphs value), and that Sale is worth $40ish million (again, Fangraphs), Trout's surplus value ends up in the range of $160 million (versus the $120 million he's owed) over the next 4 years versus about $82 million surplus value (versus the $38 million he's owed) for Sale over the next three years.

 

You better believe that if the Angels did decide to move Trout, they're going to use it as an opportunity to unload Albert Pujols as well. My guess is they MIGHT consider Trout, Pujols and $20 million for Sale.

 

If the Sox chose to move both Sale and Rodon for Trout, now you might be talking about something that would allow you to avoid taking on Pujols and the $140 million he is still owed.

 

Edit: Had to adjust the money Sox would get back from the Angels since I did not account for WAR Pujols might bring over the next 5 years.

Edited November 6, 20169 yr by iamshack

Hard to overpay for Trout. And if you think getting Trout back for sale is too little, you will not be happy with any return.

I think a Trout for elite pitching swap makes a lot of sense for both teams. Not sure if they would have reservations about dealing a fan favorite. If we could add an Encarnacion or Cespedes and a catcher in a trade for Lawrie we could start Saladino at 2B, LF/DH Melky and have all the lineup holes covered. That would be a top 2-3 offense on paper playing in the USCF bandbox for half the season.

... with one of the worst pitching staffs in baseball

Except one of the last things Robin did was announced that Saladino has a herniated disc in his lower back that did not respond as well as they hoped to treatment.

 

Right now having no additional info I don't even know if he can play in 2017.

 

Mark

You think it's that serious?

You think it's that serious?

 

Yes. You are talking about a pro baseball player with a bad back. Remember Joe Crede?

 

I had a bulging disc in my lower back five years ago and I was in a cast from my shoulders to my groin for six weeks. (I could remove it for showering though!). I'm not a pro athlete either and it was difficult. A herniated disc is much worse than a bulging disc.

 

The next step with a disc if it doesn't respond to injections or treatment is surgery.

 

And the Sox have been very quiet about this...no news, no updates.

 

Mark

Mike Trout at $34 million is a steal. Top tier HOF'er. One of the best players of all time and 24 years old!! No way to you get him for Chris Sale. Never in a million years.

Mike Trout at $34 million is a steal. Top tier HOF'er. One of the best players of all time and 24 years old!! No way to you get him for Chris Sale. Never in a million years.

Yeah, unless you offer to take Pujols. But even then, the Angels had a lot of money come off the books after this season. While they'll have basically $60 million committed just to Trout and Pujols, they don't have any other bad contracts.

 

Pujols is basically owed $140 million over the next 5 years. If you took both players back, you'd be taking on about $260 million over 5 years, with a massive contract coming due to Trout in 2021.

Yes. You are talking about a pro baseball player with a bad back. Remember Joe Crede?

 

I had a bulging disc in my lower back five years ago and I was in a cast from my shoulders to my groin for six weeks. (I could remove it for showering though!). I'm not a pro athlete either and it was difficult. A herniated disc is much worse than a bulging disc.

 

The next step with a disc if it doesn't respond to injections or treatment is surgery.

 

And the Sox have been very quiet about this...no news, no updates.

 

Mark

Furcal had the same problem and had surgery and came back. Todd Helton similar injury at same time, and he tried to rehab it at first -- unsuccessfully. Surgery works, usually. Still, he (Saladino) is in danger of being finished. Hope not.

Furcal had the same problem and had surgery and came back. Todd Helton similar injury at same time, and he tried to rehab it at first -- unsuccessfully. Surgery works, usually. Still, he (Saladino) is in danger of being finished. Hope not.

 

That's why I say to the folks who say to deal Lawrie that they need to wait and see if Saladino can even play this season first. (And that's assuming Lawrie can as well. The last news I read on him was that the Sox doctors cleared him but he feels something still isn't right with the ankle / knee / leg)

 

Mark

... with one of the worst pitching staffs in baseball

 

Well it would be playing to the strengths of our ballpark which is something we haven't done for about 15 years. Yeah the starting pitching wouldn't be good but the bullpen would be good enough. Just get our starters to go 5-6 without going off the rails. We would still have Q, Gonzo, and Shields who all pitched pretty decently at times. We would need to develop a starter from the minors and find a serviceable starter off the scrap heap. The team has been able to do this plenty of times.

 

Q would get a Cy Young if we could put together an offense like that.

Edited November 7, 20169 yr by soxforlife05

Well it would be playing to the strengths of our ballpark which is something we haven't done for about 15 years. Yeah the starting pitching wouldn't be good but the bullpen would be good enough. Just get our starters to go 5-6 without going off the rails. We would still have Q, Gonzo, and Shields who all pitched pretty decently at times. We would need to develop a starter from the minors and find a serviceable starter off the scrap heap. The team has been able to do this plenty of times.

 

Q would get a Cy Young if we could put together an offense like that.

When your response is "yes but James Shields pitched decently at times", you've told us why your idea doesn't work.

Hard to overpay for Trout. And if you think getting Trout back for sale is too little, you will not be happy with any return.

 

The Sox do hold the cards here. I don't think they're taking anything less than an overpay, and they shouldn't.

 

In a market as depressed as this one, I don't think they need to hold out for an 'overpay.' They just need to not settle for an 'underpay.'

 

What they need, my friends, is a 'pay.'

Edited November 7, 20169 yr by Eminor3rd

In a market as depressed as this one, I don't think they need to hold out for an 'overpay.' They just need to not settle for an 'underpay.'

 

What they need, my friends, is a 'pay.'

 

Missing on this deal could literally cost the team a decade. Yes, they need an overpay. They need a grand slam home run of a deal.

We already have had posters say the Sox blew it by not trading Sale and Quintana at the deadline even after it was reported Benetendi and Moncada weren't on the table.

 

The reality is, unless it's an obvious overpay, if a trade is made involving these guys, there are going to be calls for RH's head.

 

 

And if no trade is made, it is going to be widely assumed they turned down an overpay. That anyone would even consider Mike Trout too little for Chris Sale, it's hard to imagine a Sale trade getting universal praise.

Edited November 7, 20169 yr by Dick Allen

We already have had posters say the Sox blew it by not trading Sale and Quintana at the deadline even after it was reported Benetendi and Moncada weren't on the table.

The reality is, unless it's an obvious overpay, if a trade is made involving these guys, there are going to be calls for RH's head.

 

 

And if no trade is made, it is going to be widely assumed they turned down an overpay. That anyone would even consider Mike Trout too little for Chris Sale, it's hard to imagine a Sale trade getting universal praise.

 

That drunk whitesoxdave guy with the connections to the clubhouse reported the deal offered by Boston was Benintendi and I think 3 starters. Wasn't it reported the White Sox wanted Bradley Jr?

Edited November 7, 20169 yr by soxfan2014

Missing on this deal could literally cost the team a decade. Yes, they need an overpay. They need a grand slam home run of a deal.

 

Agreed. Or you hold. The Sox continue to hold the cards. Remember: Chris Sale - 3 years; Jose Quintana - 4 years.

We already have had posters say the Sox blew it by not trading Sale and Quintana at the deadline even after it was reported Benetendi and Moncada weren't on the table.

 

The reality is, unless it's an obvious overpay, if a trade is made involving these guys, there are going to be calls for RH's head.

 

 

And if no trade is made, it is going to be widely assumed they turned down an overpay. That anyone would even consider Mike Trout too little for Chris Sale, it's hard to imagine a Sale trade getting universal praise.

 

The "x wasn't on the table" stuff requires skepticism. The other reporting is that the sox were adamant on one of their ML players (likely Bradley) as part of the deal and they never really progressed.

 

For many like me, ML-proven talent is not necessary to the deal, as I'd prefer we get "near the bigs" prospect stars like Benintendi/Moncada. Heck, Benintendi then did pretty well in his two months and may be as hard to get as a Bradley. What you gain in assurance that you are getting at least one solid piece back, you lose in possible quantity.

 

Not everyone sox could receive in a package may make bigs. But having more prospects in system still provide ammo to supplement young stars with proven talent.

That drunk whitesoxdave guy with the connections to the clubhouse reported the deal offered by Boston was Benintendi and I think 3 starters. Wasn't it reported the White Sox wanted Bradley Jr?

 

Ha. I started following him on Twitter since the trade deadline, and that seem to sum him up perfectly.

Ha. I started following him on Twitter since the trade deadline, and that seem to sum him up perfectly.

 

lol I think so too.

The "x wasn't on the table" stuff requires skepticism. The other reporting is that the sox were adamant on one of their ML players (likely Bradley) as part of the deal and they never really progressed.

 

For many like me, ML-proven talent is not necessary to the deal, as I'd prefer we get "near the bigs" prospect stars like Benintendi/Moncada. Heck, Benintendi then did pretty well in his two months and may be as hard to get as a Bradley. What you gain in assurance that you are getting at least one solid piece back, you lose in possible quantity.

 

Not everyone sox could receive in a package may make bigs. But having more prospects in system still provide ammo to supplement young stars with proven talent.

 

The impression I remember is that they wanted Bradley AND their top prospects. That is why the talks never got off of the ground.

The impression I remember is that they wanted Bradley AND their top prospects. That is why the talks never got off of the ground.

 

Probably didnt get off the ground cause boston didn't want to take away from their roster in the playoff chase. I think it was said offseasn would be better to talk those kinda trades

Ken Rosenthal article on top trade targets. Hes supposed to be talking about it on the hot stove on mlb network

 

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/gallery/ken-r...-targets-110716

 

The market conditions for a trade of Sale could not be much better.

 

Sale is under control for three more seasons and $38 million -- not terribly beyond what Zack Greinke makes in a single year.

 

The free-agent starters, meanwhile, are mostly pitchers that teams do not want, certainly not at market-driven prices.

 

Will the White Sox want a ton for Sale? Of course. And they could get it, too.

I just want to reaffirm - the problem is what we all would consider overpay. I have seen some incredible packages talked about that people felt was too week and added 2-3 more top prospects which to me is just too unlikely to even bother with.

Ken Rosenthal article on top trade targets. Hes supposed to be talking about it on the hot stove on mlb network

 

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/gallery/ken-r...-targets-110716

 

The market conditions for a trade of Sale could not be much better.

 

Sale is under control for three more seasons and $38 million -- not terribly beyond what Zack Greinke makes in a single year.

 

The free-agent starters, meanwhile, are mostly pitchers that teams do not want, certainly not at market-driven prices.

 

Will the White Sox want a ton for Sale? Of course. And they could get it, too.

 

^ Just watched him on Hot Stove - he got asked if he thinks Sale gets dealt. Says he thinks so, because the Sox have no real choice but to rebuild at this point.