ChiSox1917 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (Baron @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:58 PM) I believe so yes I highly doubt Millar has any inside scoops on anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Ok cool. They normally invite insiders on there but I wasnt paying attention to who was talking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (Blackout Friday @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 04:59 PM) Rumors they may look to move an OF to make room for Trumbo. Side note: trumbo in coors would be awesome. And looking for a TOR starter. I dunno if tonight is going to be nuts or if it'll be dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFutureIsNear Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:55 PM) I'd aim for a bigger return than that. Quintana should return nearly the same value as sale did, especially due to the fourth year of control. That's 3 top 100 prospects and Stubbs/Laureno being much better prospects than the 4th from Boston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Quintana deal starts with Rogers, then add in 2-3 more (Tapia, Hoffman/Pint/Freeland, McMahon/Dom Nunez?) Not familiar at all with their prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:06 PM) Quintana deal starts with Rogers, then add in 2-3 more (Tapia, Hoffman/Pint/Freeland, McMahon/Dom Nunez?) Not familiar at all with their prospects. I would think Rodgers is an untouchable for the Rockies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:06 PM) Quintana deal starts with Rogers, then add in 2-3 more (Tapia, Hoffman/Pint/Freeland, McMahon/Dom Nunez?) Not familiar at all with their prospects. If you get Rodgers/Hoffman, doubt you get much more on tail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Also Baron thank you for filling me in. I had to catch up on work and then there wa slike 500 tweets and I couldn't figure anything out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:12 PM) I would think Rodgers is an untouchable for the Rockies. Perhaps, but we thought Moncada and Lopez were untouchable. Plus Rodgers is blocked for the time being. Rox infield is stacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 08:12 PM) I would think Rodgers is an untouchable for the Rockies. Well to be fair, so was Moncada. They HAVE to get Rodgers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:12 PM) I would think Rodgers is an untouchable for the Rockies. Why? He's so far away from the bigs. I would want a lot more from Colorado if he's the top guy they offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 08:13 PM) If you get Rodgers/Hoffman, doubt you get much more on tail. Well ya just threw in some names that caught my eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIZ-SOX Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:48 PM) If we don't get position players, 75 wins is going to be a successful season for this franchise. What planet do you live on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:18 PM) Well ya just threw in some names that caught my eye. Well, it will not be the depth. We now know that there IS a pull of quantity v. quality. And getting Rodgers back means not much more than that will return. I like the prestige of Reed but his cup of tea did scare me (and he had two). I'd be fine sox going after Tucker as their main piece from Houston and getting 3-4 of their low a level guys. But Tucker/Fisher/Stubbs seems very doable. Reed/Tucker/Stubbs realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southwest Sider Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 How serious do you guys think the Yankees would be for a Q trade? I mean, are they going to be going for it or are they trying to build up that farm rather then selling off part of the farm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:13 PM) If you get Rodgers/Hoffman, doubt you get much more on tail. Rodgers had an .821 OPS in A ball. I like that he's only 20 and looks ready for AA, but we're talking about Jose Quintana here. You should be getting 4 or 5 players of Rodgers quality or thereabouts for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggins Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (South Sider @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 08:27 PM) How serious do you guys think the Yankees would be for a Q trade? I mean, are they going to be going for it or are they trying to build up that farm rather then selling off part of the farm? I think some of it depends on if they sign Chapman. If they sign Chappy and then pivot to EE, they could be good again in a hurry, in which case Q makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southwest Sider Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (daggins @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:29 PM) I think some of it depends on if they sign Chapman. If they sign Chappy and then pivot to EE, they could be good again in a hurry, in which case Q makes sense. Hopefully Chapman and EE get figured out soon. I'd imagine they want to leave the winter meetings knowing who they're going to be playing for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (daggins @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:29 PM) I think some of it depends on if they sign Chapman. If they sign Chappy and then pivot to EE, they could be good again in a hurry, in which case Q makes sense. Amusingly, trading Sale to the Red Sox would boost Q's value to the Yankees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KMule2545 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:28 PM) Rodgers had an .821 OPS in A ball. I like that he's only 20 and looks ready for AA, but we're talking about Jose Quintana here. You should be getting 4 or 5 players of Rodgers quality or thereabouts for him. Rodgers is 20 years old and had 31 doubles and 19 home runs. He is by all accounts an elite, elite prospect and would look very nice at 3B in the future for us. You didn't get 4 or 5 Moncadas for Sale, did you? Why would you get 4 or 5 Rodgers for Q? Rodgers is a top 10 prospect in all of baseball. Rodgers + 2 or 3 guys gets it done. Edited December 8, 2016 by Ro Da Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:14 PM) Also Baron thank you for filling me in. I had to catch up on work and then there wa slike 500 tweets and I couldn't figure anything out. No problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (Ro Da Don @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 05:36 PM) Rodgers is 20 years old and had 31 doubles and 19 home runs. He is by all accounts an elite, elite prospect and would look very nice at 3B in the future for us. You didn't get 4 or 5 Moncadas for Sale, did you? Why would you get 4 or 5 Rodgers for Q? Rodgers is a top 10 prospect in all of baseball. Rodgers + 2 or 3 guys gets it done. Yeah, I want either Rodgers or Bregman for Q, otherwise I am fine holding steady for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:28 PM) Rodgers had an .821 OPS in A ball. I like that he's only 20 and looks ready for AA, but we're talking about Jose Quintana here. You should be getting 4 or 5 players of Rodgers quality or thereabouts for him. Guys, we've had 2 trades now, and none of these fantasy "BEST PROSPECT PLUS REST OF FARM" deals were close, and instead we've gotten the top player people wanted and have been fine. If we leave a deal with Quintana with Rodgers, people will be losing their damn minds in excitement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KMule2545 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:40 PM) Yeah, I want either Rodgers or Bregman for Q, otherwise I am fine holding steady for now. Except Bregman was in the Majors and Rodgers was in A ball. They wouldn't budge on Bregman for Sale, why would they for Q? Rodgers will be where Bregman is now, in 2 years. I'm happy with Rodgers+++ or Tucker+++ (I'm very high on Tucker). Slightly would prefer Rodgers but I think Tucker ends up as a phenomenal hitter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:14 PM) Perhaps, but we thought Moncada and Lopez were untouchable. Plus Rodgers is blocked for the time being. Rox infield is stacked. I don't recall anyone saying Lopez was untouchable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts