Abreu trade "unlikely"

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

No. When Dick Allen heard Hahn speak and Hahn wasn't enthused about Avi or Abreu, I knew both would be gone this winter. It will happen. Dick was there. He heard it.

So let it be written. So let it be done. Nonsense, what he heard was standard Hahn-speak ,means nothing. Meet my price and it shall be done on any player. Give me your 1st born child. That is Hahn 1st Commandment on veteran players in a rebuild.

[chitownsportsfan]

This is exactly what we should ask for.

 

Sox have all the leverage here. I like it.

[chitownsportsfan]

Name a team that has won a pennant dominantly through Free Agency. Literally the last one I've got is the 09 Yankees. That doesn't mean teams don't get some free agents, but literally everyone is using a path different from what you said. No team can make the method work that you keep saying we shoudl do. And if you would have read the post in the Avi thread only 2 or 3 posts before you talked about how "they should sign good free agents instead of bad ones", even the teams that are winning - they have free agent busts. How about your Royals, they have a pennant right? Wouldn't they prefer to no longer have Alex Gordon's contract on the books? The Cubs and that Heyward deal? If you sign 3 free agents, the odds are one of them will be a LaRoche level bust. That's how the Free Agency market works.

 

I mean even the f***ing Yankees realized you can't buy a winner primary through FA anymore. There's a reason Sale and Quintana brought what they brought. Pre FA studs are the most valuable commodity in baseball and you only get them prospect mining.

[RockRaines]

Anyone else feel like this Jose Abreu trade talk is way at overrated? Maybe because of the extremely slow off-season and this was the only remotely interesting thing that anyone could latch on to?

Yes. I dont think Boston has the chips and are trying to gain leverage for something else.

[Balta1701]

This should be a lot different than Sale/Eaton/Q. It was clear those 3 were identified as the ammo to start this rebuild. Those were the core pieces to use for the future of the franchise.

 

Abreu and Garcia could be used in the same way, but they could also stick around. To me, it's a win either way.

Honestly, if Garcia or Abreu is kept around, I don't want either of them kept around on their current deals. We're all sort of circling 2020 in this thread and these guys will be free agents before the season I'm circling. I don't want us having to spend money to keep these guys during the offseason when we should be spending to fill the last bullpen hole to get better. I don't want us saying "we're one player away" and then having Garcia walk just because someone outbids us when we were counting on him for offense from the RF spot. I don't want us not being able to spend in 2019 because we have to worry about whether or not we have a replacement for Abreu on the way. If 2020 is our year, we should know this offseason whether these guys will be here then. Give us certainty before the 2019 FA class hits. If they're going to be let go, move them now so we have time to find a replacement from Cordell or Gillaspie, and see if they can hold the spot. If we're not trading them, tear up their deals and get something done in January.

 

I don't want us giving playing time next year to guys who have a chance of not being here in 2020. Maybe someone picked up as a reliever fine, but give me guys who will be here the year we are sketching a trophy on the calendar.

[Balta1701]

If the Sox can't find a taker for Garcia this offseason, they think the value is too low, I don't want them signing him to an extension just because his value is too low on the trade market. I, like many others, aren't sold on who the real Avi is. I would think by July of 2018, we'll have a much better idea. If the Sox want to make a decision on the future of Avi then, I'm all for it, and I would actually prefer it than this offseason. You're trading an unknown commodity right now.

So here's my problem with that - we're talking 250 or 300 PAs in the first half. A guy who is a decent player can have a bad 200 PAs just by random chance. Hell, we've seen Garcia while he was a bad hitter have a good 200 PAs before. How much are you willing to bet on those couple hundred PAs?

 

If you don't believe in him enough to sign him right now, then move him for the best offer you get. If you don't believe in him enough to sign him then you should move him and clear space for someone with a good chance of being a 2020 contributor.

[chitownsportsfan]

If the Sox can't find a taker for Garcia this offseason, they think the value is too low, I don't want them signing him to an extension just because his value is too low on the trade market. I, like many others, aren't sold on who the real Avi is. I would think by July of 2018, we'll have a much better idea. If the Sox want to make a decision on the future of Avi then, I'm all for it, and I would actually prefer it than this offseason. You're trading an unknown commodity right now.

 

Problem with Avi is that (imo) he's a player that is completey reliant on physical tools and in a bad way. He's a stiff athlete but he's great in straight lines. What happens at 29 when he loses that tick on his speed and explosion? His offensive value is entirely based on his running and BA. Both of those things are going to start declining way before skills like raw power and batting eye. He's fools gold IMO and I have been one of his biggest fans and advocates here since he was acquired. I am thrilled for Avi that he had a great year but he is the quintessential sell high candidate.

[caulfield12]

Given the Sox have 2 more years of control, that's an irresponsible use of assets.

 

Avi is a unique case. You're right in 99/100 cases, 250-300 PAs is not enough to judge a player. I agree with you. But given the tremendous 2017 campaign Garcia produced, to go along with a lackluster 14-15-16, by July 1 2018, the picture should be at least a little less hazy on who the real Avi Garcia is.

 

I think you're rushing a decision when you don't have to.

 

 

That, and 2005.

 

How many of the core players on that team were in place by mid-2014? F.Garcia and Contreras were the big adds, but MOST of the moves were made that 2004/05 off-season, what was it, like 8-9 players?

 

Among their existing 40 MAN roster outfielders, I'm pretty SURE whoever we threw out there in 2018 (if Avi was dealt) WOULDN'T be around in 2020. It would be a much more obvious case that they should be traded were there not equally compelling reasons for holding onto them, for at least half of 2018.

 

Of course, the usual caveat is someone blows you away with an offer RIGHT NOW, you go ahead and do it, but how likely is that to occur (especially for offense-first players)?

 

 

With the amount of financial flexibility we'll have, I don't see any reason the same type of offseason (as 04/05) isn't possible after 2018 or 2019...just not THIS YEAR. My primary concern is not putting all of our eggs in just a few baskets, like Machado/Arenado types. White Sox history has taught the danger of this, with non-superstars like Dunn, Cabrera and LaRoche. (Of course, the danger is the fear/risk factor keeps you from ever adding one of those truly big names for fear of it blowing up...leaving you mining the second/third tier group year after year, which obviously hasn't worked, either.)

Edited November 30, 2017 by caulfield12

[Rowand44]

You can't admit this board is EXTREMELY happy with anything the front office does? This is a pro front office message board.

 

 

Because we didn't execute it right. Sox have had miserable guys in Buddy Bell on the organizational level and Robin Ventura as manager. They've arguably made some of the most bonehead acquisitions ever in trying to bring in guys to win. The ONLY way to win is not trade everybody and rebuild. Some teams with cash have done just fine in adding guys to buy a pennant. I personally think our front office gets a free pass on almost everything on here.

I’m not going to justify this with an explanation since it doesn’t matter with you but no that’s my answer to your original question.

[hi8is]

You can't admit this board is EXTREMELY happy with anything the front office does? This is a pro front office message board.

 

 

Because we didn't execute it right. Sox have had miserable guys in Buddy Bell on the organizational level and Robin Ventura as manager. They've arguably made some of the most bonehead acquisitions ever in trying to bring in guys to win. The ONLY way to win is not trade everybody and rebuild. Some teams with cash have done just fine in adding guys to buy a pennant. I personally think our front office gets a free pass on almost everything on here.

Seriously GreggiePoo, why are you still frequenting this site? I honestly can't recall a time when you've done anything other than complain.

[greg775]

Name a team that has won a pennant dominantly through Free Agency. Literally the last one I've got is the 09 Yankees. That doesn't mean teams don't get some free agents, but literally everyone is using a path different from what you said. No team can make the method work that you keep saying we shoudl do. And if you would have read the post in the Avi thread only 2 or 3 posts before you talked about how "they should sign good free agents instead of bad ones", even the teams that are winning - they have free agent busts. How about your Royals, they have a pennant right? Wouldn't they prefer to no longer have Alex Gordon's contract on the books? The Cubs and that Heyward deal? If you sign 3 free agents, the odds are one of them will be a LaRoche level bust. That's how the Free Agency market works.

Yankees, Dodgers, Boston, Cubs, yes Cubs, have all done fine spending moolah and getting free agents. Not everybody doing the rebuild thing has won big. Cubs rebuilt, yes, but also bought some players. I personally think 3 starting pitchers we trotted out there last year were an embarrassment to baseball.

 

I’m not going to justify this with an explanation since it doesn’t matter with you but no that’s my answer to your original question.

Seriously? This isn't a pro-front office board? Hahn is beloved. KW for the most part is given the benefit of the doubt all the time. Meanwhile for some reason Ozzie is destroyed and some of my favorite players destroyed (I know I know Ozzie quit on the team).

 

Seriously GreggiePoo, why are you still frequenting this site? I honestly can't recall a time when you've done anything other than complain.

That's just not true. Again do some research on threads. I stand up for my favorite players for sure and I argue against some of the current vision of the front office, butI don't complain always. Did you read my long reply on the future lineup/roster? I listed players at each position gave my takes. Nobody responds to my normal reaction posts. Some people get me; most don't. I'm a great Sox fan IMO.

Edited November 30, 2017 by greg775

[Quin]

I didn't like parting with Q (Eloy made it good in retrospect), but I would absolutely loathe losing Abreu.

 

Sadly, it makes sense if they get their price. But Jose is just a wonderful presence.

 

I'd need following packages, if we're asking arm and both legs.

 

Red Sox: Groome, Chavis + Flier - Groome helps balance the lack of LHP, Chavis shores up 3rd.

Cardinals: Kelly, Perez ++

Rockies: Dahl, Pint + Flier

 

Really have no clue who the fourth interested team is.

 

 

[hi8is]

Again do some research on threads.

 

I think that instead my time may just be prioritized to other endeavors but thanks for the invitation!

 

 

I stand up for my favorite players for sure and I argue against some of the current vision of the front office, butI don't complain always.

 

Ok, yea - complain isn't the right term... but it's hard to exactly put a name to what it is that you do, considering that I'm unable to say a certain 4 letter word on Soxtalk which both starts and ends with P... sandwiched between which are two Os.

 

Perhaps we should just call it "gregging." You're constantly gregging, dude.

 

Did you read my long reply on the future lineup/roster? I listed players at each position gave my takes. Nobody responds to my normal reaction posts.

 

I read it and responded to it. Here's another aspect of "gregging." Presenting false information during an assertion.

 

Some people get me; most don't. I'm a great Sox fan IMO.

 

If I had a vagina it would be.... wait a minute... to graphic... against board policy. Must comply. Let's just say that I wub the gregging.

 

 

Smooch smooch buttercup.

[Dominikk85]

I didn't like parting with Q (Eloy made it good in retrospect), but I would absolutely loathe losing Abreu.

 

Sadly, it makes sense if they get their price. But Jose is just a wonderful presence.

 

I'd need following packages, if we're asking arm and both legs.

 

Red Sox: Groome, Chavis + Flier - Groome helps balance the lack of LHP, Chavis shores up 3rd.

Cardinals: Kelly, Perez ++

Rockies: Dahl, Pint + Flier

 

Really have no clue who the fourth interested team is.

 

I would love those but abreu is projected for about 4.5 WAR in two years of control which is worth roughly 40M on the open market. his projected salary is like 30M for those two years if not a Little more so he doesn't have

a ton of Surplus value. there is some upside with abreu but I don't think he has more than like 15M of Surplus value(and that is extremely optimistic). that is roughly the value of one grade 50 (bottom of top100) prospect.

 

now you might find a Team overpay some but not much. also if you want JBJ for abreu you don't get any additional pieces expect maybe a throw in guy. JBJ has a lot more suplus value than abreu, if anything the sox would Need to add.

now the red sox Need a slugger so I might see them overpay some but still we are mostly talking a one for one swap here.

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dont-trade-...for-jose-abreu/

 

maybe if the sox throw in some cash they can get a better prospect. if they don't eat cash getting groome or kelly straight up would be a great deal.

Edited November 30, 2017 by GermanSock

[hi8is]

I would love those but abreu is projected for about 4.5 WAR in two years of control which is worth roughly 40M on the open market.

The thing that's really impossible to speculate or evaluate is the intangible value that Abreu brings, specifically to our club during those next two years.

 

How much of an impact will he have on Moncada over these two years? What is the value of that?

 

How much of an impact will Abreu have on Robert whenever they're together in the Spring or at other potential times in 2019?

 

What does his leadership translate to that will last past his contract which can equate to some value?

 

It's completely impossible to say but I'd wager that Abreu has the most "intangible value" on our team than any of the other 29 out there.

 

Because of this... and this alone... I just don't see him being moved.

 

If Hahn does pull the trigger, I won't be entirely shocked but the return is sure to be both arms and both legs if it goes down.

Edited November 30, 2017 by hi8is

[Dominikk85]

I think it Comes down to the Price. if Hahn gets a haul abreu will be gone, no doubt about that. but if they only get a marginal package they might just as well Keep him around to make moncada and Robert happy. but if you get a really good package you Need to trade him, Team chemistry is important but most important is Talent.

[hi8is]

I think it Comes down to the Price. if Hahn gets a haul abreu will be gone, no doubt about that. but if they only get a marginal package they might just as well Keep him around to make moncada and Robert happy. but if you get a really good package you Need to trade him, Team chemistry is important but most important is Talent.

It's either trade or extend. There really is no other option. I could be content with both directions, really.

[soxforlife05]

Unfortunately, that's only true if someone is willing to bite.

 

If someone wanted to gamble on extending him early they would make the trade

[caulfield12]

Yankees, Dodgers, Boston, Cubs, yes Cubs, have all done fine spending moolah and getting free agents. Not everybody doing the rebuild thing has won big. Cubs rebuilt, yes, but also bought some players. I personally think 3 starting pitchers we trotted out there last year were an embarrassment to baseball.

 

 

Seriously? This isn't a pro-front office board? Hahn is beloved. KW for the most part is given the benefit of the doubt all the time. Meanwhile for some reason Ozzie is destroyed and some of my favorite players destroyed (I know I know Ozzie quit on the team).

 

 

That's just not true. Again do some research on threads. I stand up for my favorite players for sure and I argue against some of the current vision of the front office, butI don't complain always. Did you read my long reply on the future lineup/roster? I listed players at each position gave my takes. Nobody responds to my normal reaction posts. Some people get me; most don't. I'm a great Sox fan IMO.

 

Name a team with a #15-25 payroll in MLB that can pull of that trick of competing consistently without rebuilding primarily through their farm system...it’s the exception to the rule.

 

 

Edited November 30, 2017 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

Name a team that has won a pennant dominantly through Free Agency. Literally the last one I've got is the 09 Yankees. That doesn't mean teams don't get some free agents, but literally everyone is using a path different from what you said. No team can make the method work that you keep saying we shoudl do. And if you would have read the post in the Avi thread only 2 or 3 posts before you talked about how "they should sign good free agents instead of bad ones", even the teams that are winning - they have free agent busts. How about your Royals, they have a pennant right? Wouldn't they prefer to no longer have Alex Gordon's contract on the books? The Cubs and that Heyward deal? If you sign 3 free agents, the odds are one of them will be a LaRoche level bust. That's how the Free Agency market works.

Cubs. Half their line up was free agents. A quarter of it was trades and a quarter was the draft, int. signings.

[Balta1701]

Yankees, Dodgers, Boston, Cubs, yes Cubs, have all done fine spending moolah and getting free agents. Not everybody doing the rebuild thing has won big. Cubs rebuilt, yes, but also bought some players. I personally think 3 starting pitchers we trotted out there last year were an embarrassment to baseball.

So you dare to add the Cubs who went through several last in their division finishes in their rebuilding process? You dare to tell me we need to spend big in free agency and then name Boston who spent big money on Pablo Sandoval and Hanley Ramirez - literally the only reason Boston is competitive right now is because they stopped that route. The Yankees kept trotting out $200 million payrolls and then started missing the playoffs. They backed off and rebuilt around Judge, Sanchez, and Severino, and look what happened.

 

The Dodgers are insanely good at the draft. Corey Seager, Bellinger, their outfielders, they're developing talent and that's why they're on top.

 

These teams are spending money but it is not their main strategy. They are spending money to fill holes, and even then they are winding up with busts. The Cubs have a contract that is Adam LaRoche quality. You have cited him several times as the kind of thing we shouldn't do. Adam LaRoche is far cheaper than Jayson Heyward and Heyward imploded. You still haven't answered why you're ok with giving money to bums like Heyward and Sandoval?

[Balta1701]

Cubs. Half their line up was free agents. A quarter of it was trades and a quarter was the draft, int. signings.

half their lineup so 4.5 players?

 

Contreras, Rizzo, Bryant, Happ, Schwarber, Almora, Russell, Baez. Which of those are free agent signings? Zobrist and Heyward were, but they have been poor signings, and John Jay was a backup. Out of their lineup please tell me where the major contributing free agents are, because I don't believe you.

[Chicago White Sox]

I would love those but abreu is projected for about 4.5 WAR in two years of control which is worth roughly 40M on the open market. his projected salary is like 30M for those two years if not a Little more so he doesn't have

a ton of Surplus value. there is some upside with abreu but I don't think he has more than like 15M of Surplus value(and that is extremely optimistic). that is roughly the value of one grade 50 (bottom of top100) prospect.

 

now you might find a Team overpay some but not much. also if you want JBJ for abreu you don't get any additional pieces expect maybe a throw in guy. JBJ has a lot more suplus value than abreu, if anything the sox would Need to add.

now the red sox Need a slugger so I might see them overpay some but still we are mostly talking a one for one swap here.

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dont-trade-...for-jose-abreu/

 

maybe if the sox throw in some cash they can get a better prospect. if they don't eat cash getting groome or kelly straight up would be a great deal.

Where the hell does a 4.5 WAR projection come from exactly? He’s put up 14.5 WAR over four seasons (3.6 avg). He’s coming off a 4.1 WAR season and has exactly one season below 3.2. To expect him to suddenly drop to a 2.2 WAR in his age 31 & 32 seasons is crazy to me. I would question any projection system that is predicting that type of fall off. To me, I don’t see how anything below 6 WAR makes any sense and I would expect him to be closer to a 7 WAR player. So combine that surplus value with the draft pick he’ll get you when/if he leaves in free agency and he should be plenty valuable.

[Balta1701]

Where the hell does a 4.5 WAR projection come from exactly? He’s put up 14.5 WAR over four seasons (3.6 avg). He’s coming off a 4.1 WAR season and has exactly one season below 3.2. To expect him to suddenly drop to a 2.2 WAR in his age 31 & 32 seasons is crazy to me. I would question any projection system that is predicting that type of fall off. To me, I don’t see how anything below 6 WAR makes any sense and I would expect him to be closer to a 7 WAR player. So combine that surplus value with the draft pick he’ll get you when/if he leaves in free agency and he should be plenty valuable.

If I wanted to be as pessimistic as you are optimistic, over his age 28 and 29 seasons he put up 5 WAR, so your statement that "nothing below 6 WAR makes sense" for his age 31 and 32 years is undercut by him doing exactly that 2 years ago.

 

The reality is probably somewhere in-between. I think one of the reasons his age 29 season was so bad probably was that he had some leg problems in the first half that he played through. If he stays healthy your 6 is probably pretty close, if that flares back up then the projections could be pretty good.

[Dominikk85]

Where the hell does a 4.5 WAR projection come from exactly? He’s put up 14.5 WAR over four seasons (3.6 avg). He’s coming off a 4.1 WAR season and has exactly one season below 3.2. To expect him to suddenly drop to a 2.2 WAR in his age 31 & 32 seasons is crazy to me. I would question any projection system that is predicting that type of fall off. To me, I don’t see how anything below 6 WAR makes any sense and I would expect him to be closer to a 7 WAR player. So combine that surplus value with the draft pick he’ll get you when/if he leaves in free agency and he should be plenty valuable.

 

fangraphs.

 

after Age 31 the projections subtract about 0.5 WAR per year (and I think like 0.8 or so after Age 35). the projection says 2.8 for 2018 (291/349/520 line with a 129 wRC+ and 145 games played), so minus 0.5 that leaves

2.3 for 2019.

 

BTW I just realized my math was wrong, of course it is 5.1 WAR.

 

however I think my salary estimation was also low, the expecation is around 17 and 20M, so the value is 46M vs a value of 37M.

 

so there is some Surplus value but not a ton.

 

I could actually see the projections being a Little low, so maybe I would give him 6 WAR which means a Surplus value of around 17M (at 9 M per win).

 

here is an article what prospects are worth

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/valuing-the...-100-prospects/

 

abreu should give you a top 100 but not really much more, maybe a top100 and one or two Lotto tickets with some warts.

Edited November 30, 2017 by GermanSock