southsider2k5 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Just keep in mind where Joel Sherman works... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:46 AM) The Sox should take both of them and clean out the Yankees system. Eh. If they were one year deals, I'd agree. BOth are signed through 2018. Would add $25M to the payroll both this year and next. That is quite a lot to swallow, and would definitely affect the Sox chances of competing in 2018 if a bunch of stuff went right this season with prospect development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:50 AM) Eh. If they were one year deals, I'd agree. BOth are signed through 2018. Would add $25M to the payroll both this year and next. That is quite a lot to swallow, and would definitely affect the Sox chances of competing in 2018 if a bunch of stuff went right this season with prospect development. I would definitely take one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:50 AM) Eh. If they were one year deals, I'd agree. BOth are signed through 2018. Would add $25M to the payroll both this year and next. That is quite a lot to swallow, and would definitely affect the Sox chances of competing in 2018 if a bunch of stuff went right this season with prospect development. If we were to take on those guys, I would want their entire top 5. To start with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:53 AM) If we were to take on those guys, I would want their entire top 5. To start with. Yah, but that's not going to happen. I'd take one for sure. Both seems like a huge stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGajewski18 Posted December 27, 2016 Author Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:49 AM) Just keep in mind where Joel Sherman works... Keep in mind, BN is Kenny's mouthpiece too. It'll be interesting to see who breaks news since Rosenthal won't be tweeting for a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:54 AM) Keep in mind, BN is Kenny's mouthpiece too. It'll be interesting to see who breaks news since Rosenthal won't be tweeting for a bit. Rosenthal take a vaca or what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:55 AM) Rosenthal take a vaca or what? I think so. Said he was going off the grid for a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:54 AM) Keep in mind, BN is Kenny's mouthpiece too. It'll be interesting to see who breaks news since Rosenthal won't be tweeting for a bit. Except there seems to be other corroboration of his story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGajewski18 Posted December 27, 2016 Author Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:00 PM) Except there seems to be other corroboration of his story. Meaning? Sorry, confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunt Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:00 PM) Except there seems to be other corroboration of his story. Seems Bruce confirmed report, but his reporting is equally suspect IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Dunt @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:04 PM) Seems Bruce confirmed report, but his reporting is equally suspect IMO lol he literally just said that Bob Nightengale reported it in his tweet. His reporting is beyond suspect. Edited December 27, 2016 by soxfan2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmb0928 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (hi8is @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 10:38 AM) Clearly you can see I'm losing my mind as well So why not take back Headley in a deal, pay a little Robertson salary and get the huge haul we want. The yanks are one of the few teams that could use some salary relief from the luxury tax. We can afford to take it on. Headley is due 13 million in each of the next 2 years. Maybe Headley has a fantastic first half and we can unload him to a team in need at the deadline. If not he keeps the seat warm for our prospects and could be a good veteran in the clubhouse to help teach the youngsters. I don't recall him being a bad teammate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Con te Giolito Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Gardner and Headley are not negative value pieces and may actually give the Sox a couple guys to flip at the deadline. And really I'm not on board with the idea of breaking loss records, having a watchable MLB team would be nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGajewski18 Posted December 27, 2016 Author Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:07 PM) Gardner and Headley are not negative value pieces and may actually give the Sox a couple guys to flip at the deadline. And really I'm not on board with the idea of breaking loss records, having a watchable MLB team would be nice. They certainly don't add a lot of value in deals. If it means trading Robertson and taking back one of these guys to get a good return then do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmb0928 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:07 PM) Gardner and Headley are not negative value pieces and may actually give the Sox a couple guys to flip at the deadline. And really I'm not on board with the idea of breaking loss records, having a watchable MLB team would be nice. Exactly, you have to field a team so get good character players and guys who have something to prove. Both of those guys seem like good character guys and they are steady decent ballplayers. They are old, but not ancient. 32 and 33 right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 I really doubt the Yankees adding another stud prospect would be determined by taking back Headley or Gardner. I can see taking back Headley or Gardner to make the deal work being a requirement, but it wouldn't be the the difference between acquiring Torres or Frazier and Torres and Frazier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:07 PM) Gardner and Headley are not negative value pieces and may actually give the Sox a couple guys to flip at the deadline. And really I'm not on board with the idea of breaking loss records, having a watchable MLB team would be nice. If it's true Headley and Gardner do not have negative value then the Yanks adding them to the trade lessens the overall prospect return for the Sox. No thank you. Taking Headley or Gardner back in a trade should only be done if it enhances the prospect return somehow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeky Magee Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:16 PM) I really doubt the Yankees adding another stud prospect would be determined by taking back Headley or Gardner. I can see taking back Headley or Gardner to make the deal work being a requirement, but it wouldn't be the the difference between acquiring Torres or Frazier and Torres and Frazier. Right, they were worth 2.6 (Headley) and 2.4 WAR (Gardner) last year and are owed $26m/2 years, and $23m/2 years respectively, if they really wanted to give them away they wouldn't have to include a top prospect to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmb0928 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:13 PM) They certainly don't add a lot of value in deals. If it means trading Robertson and taking back one of these guys to get a good return then do it. Gardner last 2 years is about the same as Eaton in stats but about 20 pts lower in average and 10 pts lower in OBP. Steals a few more bases. Headley about the same with a 30 pt lower average and OBP but still not a terrible ballplayer. A real positive about these guys is that they have each averaged over 150 games played per year over the last 4 years. They have stayed healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Con te Giolito Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 If it's true Headley and Gardner do not have negative value then the Yanks adding them to the trade lessens the overall prospect return for the Sox. No thank you. Taking Headley or Gardner back in a trade should only be done if it enhances the prospect return somehow. Yankees are obviously clearing money to go hog wild next two offseasons so they have their own motivations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattchoo Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 If the Yanks and Sox were to make a deal that is Q + Robertson, the return for the Sox should be Torres, Rutherford, and one of Frazier or Judge. Then some fliers on low prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Clearing headless to make way for the prospects you also just traded to sox doesn't make sense for them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmb0928 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:22 PM) Right, they were worth 2.6 (Headley) and 2.4 WAR (Gardner) last year and are owed $26m/2 years, and $23m/2 years respectively, if they really wanted to give them away they wouldn't have to include a top prospect to do so. The point is you are doing the yanks a favor by taking on the contract and saving them a ton of money and getting rid of guys who are on the downside of their career and blocking playing time for their young players. It is exactly what the White Sox should use in negotiations. The negotiations are more than the value of the player on the field. You really think they could get anything from anyone for those guys? You are taking on guys nobody wants to sweeten the deal for the Yanks. Glad some of you aren't negotiating for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeky Magee Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 QUOTE (ecupittfan @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 12:27 PM) The point is you are doing the yanks a favor by taking on the contract and saving them a ton of money and getting rid of guys who are on the downside of their career and blocking playing time for their young players. It is exactly what the White Sox should use in negotiations. The negotiations are more than the value of the player on the field. You really think they could get anything from anyone for those guys? You are taking on guys nobody wants to sweeten the deal for the Yanks. Glad some of you aren't negotiating for us. Not really. As I said, it doesn't really count as doing them a favour when they could just do it to another team and probably get something back for it rather than give something away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts