Princess Dye Posted November 19, 2016 Author Share Posted November 19, 2016 QUOTE (daggins @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 04:05 PM) They could also trade absolutely nobody and end up buying. Basically, we still have no idea what is going on. waking up tomorrow to a multi-year offer to Fowler rumor is low on my list of Surprises Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorStSox Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 I don't believe it at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 A big reason to move Quintana this offseason is because he's the 3rd best available SP right now (After Sale and Archer). Next off-season, he will have to compete with Arrieta, Darvish, possibly Cueto, Pineda, Tanaka, plus the available pitchers for trade. And then in 2018 obviously it's the biggest FA class in MLB history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerksticks Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 QUOTE (hi8is @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 03:43 PM) I wouldn't be surprised if right now the Dodgers are telling teams they "don't really want to let go of Puig anymore because he has shown encouraging signs". The point it this: You can't trust a damned thing in the media during an offseason. Yessir. Your post is all that matters, and it should really be PMed to every member at the beginning of each offseason as a reminder. Best to just ignore it all until it's formally announced. I learned years ago what a fruitless waste of time it is giving interest to people with sources, or those who get pride from cracking a story an hour before it's announced- what a colossal waste of a man's time. Even if a story is cracked early it still doesn't become at all interesting until all the pieces are known. And that only comes from a formal announcement. Hang in there Sox fans; hope we get a BIIIIIG bat! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 02:13 PM) Yessir. Your post is all that matters, and it should really be PMed to every member at the beginning of each offseason as a reminder. Best to just ignore it all until it's formally announced. I learned years ago what a fruitless waste of time it is giving interest to people with sources, or those who get pride from cracking a story an hour before it's announced- what a colossal waste of a man's time. Even if a story is cracked early it still doesn't become at all interesting until all the pieces are known. And that only comes from a formal announcement. Yup. QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 02:13 PM) Hang in there Sox fans; hope we get a BIIIIIG bat! Ewww. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 04:11 PM) A big reason to move Quintana this offseason is because he's the 3rd best available SP right now (After Sale and Archer). Next off-season, he will have to compete with Arrieta, Darvish, possibly Cueto, Pineda, Tanaka, plus the available pitchers for trade. And then in 2018 obviously it's the biggest FA class in MLB history. This is true. They should get as much for Quintana as they are for Sale though and it's probably not going to happen. Deciding you need to trade someone with 4 years of control isn't a prudent way of doing business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFutureIsNear Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 I'm not so sure we should take a Buster Olney report so literally. Everyone has their price, I'm sure the Phillies didn't have plans of trading Ken Giles last year until the Astros threw that ridiculous offer in their face. The off season is fluid. If come March a contender wiffed on what little SP market there is they could easily blow our doors off with an offer for Q that can't be refused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 This sounds like the no offers of three years or longer last offseason nonsense. Why we would even put idiotic stuff like that out there as a floating/planted media rumor is beyond me. How about we finally get some results? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 02:34 PM) If true, this proves they're planning a half-ass rebuild. We should be open to moving anyone other than Rodon & Anderson if the right price is met. True, although I would call it a major retooling. If done right, it could work (big if). Not being willing to move Jones seems really silly. Edited November 20, 2016 by GreenSox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 06:32 PM) True, although I would call it a major retooling. If done right, it could work (big if). And likely a large amount of spending after 2018...especially if you don't crush the Sale trade. See Sabathia to Brewers for sheer and utter garbage. http://m.mlb.com/news/article/3084786// The Indians were able to survive that one, though. Brings a smile thinking back to Ozzie jokingly referring to him as LaFatta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatScott82 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 06:07 PM) This sounds like the no offers of three years or longer last offseason nonsense. Why we would even put idiotic stuff like that out there as a floating/planted media rumor is beyond me. How about we finally get some results? I agree. They simply can't make a decision or focus on one direction or when they do actually pick a direction, they fail to execute-- like all the time. Seriously, how do they still have a job? Their rationale for not making trades at the deadline in 2015 was they felt they "were still in it" Boy that was horrible judgment. Not to mention they half assed another winter of fixing the team- bringing in Frazier and a bunch cheap scraps. In 2016 at the trade deadline-- their rationale for not beginning the rebuild was that "teams in the race were unwilling to deal from their main roster to obtain high needs-- we will have more trade options in the offseason when there is an even playing field" or "it was hard to deal veterans with more than one year left on their contracts... Seriously? Nobody wanted Frazier or Melky? Seriously, what will their next excuse be for failing to operate a successful rebuilding offseason? "Nothing panned out so we will gage the market again in July" Edited November 20, 2016 by GreatScott82 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 So the proof that they will not trade Q under any circumstance is a team that talked to them and Q 's name didn't come up? If that team was interested in Q why didn't they bring him up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 06:42 PM) I agree. They simply can't make a decision or focus on one direction or when they do actually pick a direction, they fail to execute-- like all the time. Seriously, how do they still have a job? Their rationale for not making trades at the deadline in 2015 was they felt they "were still in it" Boy that was horrible judgment. Not to mention they half assed another winter of fixing the team- bringing in Frazier and a bunch cheap scraps. In 2016 at the trade deadline-- their rationale for not beginning the rebuild was that "teams in the race were unwilling to deal from their main roster to obtain high needs-- we will have more trade options in the offseason when there is an even playing field" or "it was hard to deal veterans with more than one year left on their contracts... Seriously? Nobody wanted Frazier or Melky? Seriously, what will their next excuse be for failing to operate a successful rebuilding offseason? "Nothing panned out so we will gage the market again in July" Or Jones. The odds of him lasting four more years without recurring arm and back problems for someone with his mechanics...not good. Speaking of reliever values, Cecil just signed with the Cards for $30.5 million over four years. Edited November 20, 2016 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 06:38 PM) And likely a large amount of spending after 2018...especially if you don't crush the Sale trade. Well, I am confident in saying that if the Sox don't crush the Sale trade then it will be a major failure. But for the long haul, they have to do a better job drafting, signing international players, and development. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenksycat Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Benintendi Eaton Cespedes Abreu Melky Frazier Anderson Moncada Catcher Q Rodon Gonzo Shields Fulmer Colins + Adams in 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 10:45 PM) Colins + Adams ( + Sheilds further decline ) - Fraizer - Melky - Gonzo in 2018 Fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boopa1219 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 The article never said that guys with 4+ years of control are off the table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Nov 20, 2016 -> 02:31 AM) The article never said that guys with 4+ years of control are off the table. From the article... "The White Sox have started the process of a massive sell-off, with other teams increasingly convinced they will deal Chris Sale. “And once you trade him,” said the evaluator, “why would you stop there?” They’ve told teams they’re willing to deal any player who has fewer than four years of team control." So you're right, they didn't say they WOULDN'T deal any player with 4+ years, but just that they are willing to deal players with less than 4 years, which implies the former. Edited November 20, 2016 by ChiliIrishHammock24 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Actually I gotta say that is a meaningful difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Nov 20, 2016 -> 12:45 AM) Benintendi Eaton Cespedes Abreu Melky Frazier Anderson Moncada Catcher Q Rodon Gonzo Shields Fulmer Colins + Adams in 2018 If that's the rotation we open 2017 with, I don't want to waste money on Cespedes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 (edited) Here is a Rick Hahn quote that contradicts the thread title. He really would have no reason to lie. http://m.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article/208...chable-players/ Edited November 20, 2016 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCCWS Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 20, 2016 -> 09:25 AM) Here is a Rick Hahn quote that contradicts the thread title. He really would have no reason to lie. http://m.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article/208...chable-players/ Agree although it is a little stale as he has had 10+ days to see more of the potential market. But the last paragraph probably is still in play as well. A lot of our guys, given their druthers, want to win a championship in Chicago," Hahn said. "And we've made no secret the last several years that is has been our preference to win with the high caliber of players we have here now. Again, until there starts being transactions in that direction, we're evaluating all our options. Edited November 20, 2016 by SCCWS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Soxfan Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 I still do not believe the Chairman is going to allow a rebuild. Sale might be traded, but then we are going to be told that the Sox are in a much better position to compete now with the players Hahn gets in return. I truly believe this is a smoke screen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 QUOTE (Springfield SoxFan @ Nov 20, 2016 -> 09:50 AM) I still do not believe the Chairman is going to allow a rebuild. Sale might be traded, but then we are going to be told that the Sox are in a much better position to compete now with the players Hahn gets in return. I truly believe this is a smoke screen. Yeah I'm not buying a full tear down. I think they deal Sale, Robertson and then a few guys on one year deals and kinda "go for it" this year by signing stop gap types (Rasmus/Gomez) for an OF spot and deal guys in July when we are in 4th place and look to compete in 2018. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenksycat Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 20, 2016 -> 08:03 AM) If that's the rotation we open 2017 with, I don't want to waste money on Cespedes. SP market is light and the plan involves a ton of praying, but if we're doing this bulls*** half in half out for another year I think that's the best we can hope for Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.