January 21, 20197 yr 6 minutes ago, BrianAnderson said: Another example that might ring more true to home for you is Jose Abreu. If you received Bryce Bush, Bummer or Fulmer in return for Abreu would you be happy? Yes? (Yeah I removed the WS part and that's a good point).
January 21, 20197 yr BTW, if anyone is interested, one year subscriptions to The Athletic are $24 today.
January 21, 20197 yr Just now, Balta1701 said: Yes? (Yeah I removed the WS part and that's a good point). Two cost controlled high ceiling lefties, plus a lottery ticket infielder for an 1B with a year to FA? Yeah, I would do that too.
January 21, 20197 yr 11 minutes ago, BrianAnderson said: Charlie Morton went to FA this offseason and got 2/$30mm. Also an older pitcher, also very solid KO guy. Lol. Morton is 35 and a 3.1 WAR pitcher. Hill is 38 and was a 1.9 WAR. Hill would not have gotten $18,000,000 this year on the open market. Closer to half. 11 minutes ago, BrianAnderson said: Another example that might ring more true to home for you is Jose Abreu. If you received Bryce Bush, Bummer or Fulmer in return for Abreu would you be happy? Abreu has little to no value over his existing contract. If the Sox were looking to move payroll that is the return they would expect to receive. 11 minutes ago, BrianAnderson said: Kershaw is coming off many injured years... they have a young guy in Walker Buehler ... Ryu ... Maeda ... Urias ... Stripling ..... so let's put the cards on the tables. Why would they trade Hill? Because that is 6 pitchers ahead of Hill. AND they are possibly trying to stay under the luxury tax. 11 minutes ago, BrianAnderson said: This isn't MLB The Show 2019.... it's real life. Rich Hill isn't being traded and certainly not being traded as some add on to a Joc Pederson trade. I think the Rich Hill thought process was a result of OTHERS trying to speculate what the Sox might be able to offer the Dodgers in regards to the Pederson trade rumor. Edited January 21, 20197 yr by GREEDY
January 21, 20197 yr 2 minutes ago, GREEDY said: Lol. Morton is 35 and a 3.1 WAR pitcher. Hill is 38 and was a 1.9 WAR. Hill would not have gotten $18,000,000 this year on the open market. Closer to half. Abreu has little to no value over his existing contract. If the Sox were looking to move payroll that is the return they would expect to receive. Because that is 6 pitchers ahead of Hill. AND they are possibly trying to stay under the luxury tax. I think the Rich Hill thought process was a result of OTHERS trying to speculate what the Sox might be able to offer the Dodgers. We'll agree to disagree. I put Rich Hill and Morton in the same category. Morton is slightly more valuable because of health issues. If you told me Hill would have a completely healthy year, I'd take Hill, but that's as likely as the Sox making the playoffs this year. So yes, on the free agent market he's probably worth $10-13mm a year for a year or two contract. If Matt Harvey is getting what he did from the Angels and Garret Richards is getting $15mm to rehab... then Rich Hill can get $10-13mm easily. There are only so many pitchers that you can rely on in the playoffs.. and that is valuable. Rich Hill is one of those guys (if healthy). Rich Hill can be injured all year and the Dodgers don't care.. they need him in October. in regards to your six pitchers... check how many they carried last year... they have a nice reputation of fake DL trips and balancing their rotation pretty deep to manage innings pitched. This year will be no different. My guess.. and feel free to bookmark it.. they'll use all 6-7 pitchers... then come July go after a SP close to FA. maybe even Bumgarner to solidfy for their stretch run. On Abreu I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. Check his stats since he's been on the Sox. I'll continue to keep him and look to extend him at a reasonable value of like 3/30 where he can serve as our DH.
January 21, 20197 yr I wonder if Rich Hill basically taking himself out of that game has soured the Dodgers (especially Roberts) on him at all.
January 21, 20197 yr If I had to come up with a fair trade, I’d probably say Jace for Joc. Fry was elite last year but has the two TJS’s hanging over his head. I’m not sure how I’d feel about that trade, but I think the Dodgers would definitely consider it. Edited January 21, 20197 yr by Chicago White Sox
January 21, 20197 yr 2 minutes ago, whitesoxwinner said: So much for something happening soon Bulls got melo
January 21, 20197 yr 2 minutes ago, aeichhor said: Bulls got melo And money, sooooo........Machado signing imminent?
January 21, 20197 yr 3 minutes ago, GenericUserName said: And money, sooooo........Machado signing imminent? The teams are not funded by the same sources.
January 21, 20197 yr 3 minutes ago, GenericUserName said: And money, sooooo........Machado signing imminent? And Melo is going to be releases as soon as he clears waivers.
January 21, 20197 yr Just now, Quin said: The teams are not funded by the same sources. Just now, Peacock Wrestler said: And Melo is going to be releases as soon as he clears waivers. You guys....
January 21, 20197 yr 55 minutes ago, fathom said: No kidding, it's amazing how people think the Dodgers will give him up for "nothing". He has far more value than Abreu does, yet people think the Sox would get top 100 guys for him. How is he valuable to the Sox ? Does he put them over the hump in either year ? Do you you think he can be traded for more than the Sox would give up for him ? Would he help us get a better draft choice in years we won't make the playoffs ? If the answer to those questions is NO then why do we need him ? Edited January 21, 20197 yr by CaliSoxFanViaSWside
January 21, 20197 yr 7 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said: How is he valuable to the Sox ? Does he put them over the hump in either year ? Do you you think he can be traded for more than the Sox would give up for him ? Would he help us get a better draft choice in years we won't make the playoffs ? If the answer to those questions is NO then why do we need him ? There is a difference between tanking and winning a world series. this whole "if we aren't winning this year we should just tank" mantra is tired. We had what ... the 8th pick a few years ago and picked Carson Fulmer.. it's not really where you pick as much as who you pick (also I realize this is probably the worst example as Benintendi went the pick before.. so the easy argument would be if we didn't win a few pointless games we could have him) What I'm saying though is most years there are just as many busts at 6 as there are at 15 or 24. By the theory above we don't need Rodon, Abreu, any of the bullpen guys we got, Yolmer... really anybody. We'll tank for 2 more years and then All of these minor leaguers are going to come up all at once and koom-by-yah were going to the world series!! These tank years are nothing more than a PR stunt and excuse for JR to line his pockets more.
January 21, 20197 yr 2 minutes ago, BrianAnderson said: These tank years are nothing more than a PR stunt and excuse for JR to line his pockets more. This is a really bad take.
January 21, 20197 yr 1 hour ago, Dick Allen said: BTW, if anyone is interested, one year subscriptions to The Athletic are $24 today. It is the best 2 bucks a month you can spend.
January 21, 20197 yr 20 minutes ago, BrianAnderson said: There is a difference between tanking and winning a world series. this whole "if we aren't winning this year we should just tank" mantra is tired. We had what ... the 8th pick a few years ago and picked Carson Fulmer.. it's not really where you pick as much as who you pick (also I realize this is probably the worst example as Benintendi went the pick before.. so the easy argument would be if we didn't win a few pointless games we could have him) What I'm saying though is most years there are just as many busts at 6 as there are at 15 or 24. By the theory above we don't need Rodon, Abreu, any of the bullpen guys we got, Yolmer... really anybody. We'll tank for 2 more years and then All of these minor leaguers are going to come up all at once and koom-by-yah were going to the world series!! These tank years are nothing more than a PR stunt and excuse for JR to line his pockets more. It's not just the draft pick. It's giving up something to get Pederson. If the Dodgers took him straight up for Carson Fulmer, I'd wonder what the Dodgers were thinking but I'd do it. But it makes no sense for the Dodgers to do that, they should be able to get way more for him from a team that is competitive right now and has an OF hole. There are several. If the Dodgers were going to move him, then we need to pay fair value for him, and there's no real obvious reason for the White Sox to do that. It makes us better right now, but it makes us worse or at least leaves us less things to trade 2 years from now when we might actually have a genuinely loaded roster. We'd be trading the difference between, say, 74 and 76 wins now, for something that could be the difference between 94 and 92 games in a season we care about.
January 21, 20197 yr 10 minutes ago, turnin' two said: It is the best 2 bucks a month you can spend. It is, Athletic is sports content heaven.
January 21, 20197 yr 6 minutes ago, BrianAnderson said: There is a difference between tanking and winning a world series. this whole "if we aren't winning this year we should just tank" mantra is tired. We had what ... the 8th pick a few years ago and picked Carson Fulmer.. it's not really where you pick as much as who you pick (also I realize this is probably the worst example as Benintendi went the pick before.. so the easy argument would be if we didn't win a few pointless games we could have him) What I'm saying though is most years there are just as many busts at 6 as there are at 15 or 24. By the theory above we don't need Rodon, Abreu, any of the bullpen guys we got, Yolmer... really anybody. We'll tank for 2 more years and then All of these minor leaguers are going to come up all at once and koom-by-yah were going to the world series!! These tank years are nothing more than a PR stunt and excuse for JR to line his pockets more. No the same theory doesn't apply to guys we already have because we aren't giving anything up for them. I said the same things as you about all the guys coming up and magically competing but that was when I was arguing for signing JD Martinez last year to a long term contract or signing Moustaskas as trade bait. In 2 years Pederson will be gone. as will Alonso, Jay . Colome, Hererra , Abreu, Castillo. McCann, Leury Garcia. If they are not here long term or for competing years their only value is in trades or being a better team in years we don't make the playoffs. My arguments in the past were acquiring FA's agents to either trade or keep but wouldn't cost us anything but money for non contention years. Now all of a sudden everyone thinks we can compete which I think means make the playoffs when that is very high unlikely, at least this year, with an outside chance at next year if a whale pitcher can be bought and if the young starting pitchers can be good right away That in itself is a BIG if.
January 21, 20197 yr 8 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: We'd be trading the difference between, say, 74 and 76 wins now, for something that could be the difference between 94 and 92 games in a season we care about. I think we should wait to see who is traded ... I'm not nearly worried as many people are. These "prospects" rarely turn into much. For every Tatis trade there are 4 more Jeremy Reed trades. That's not to say I'm advocating trading our prospects for 2 years of a stop-gap.. I'm just saying that I don't think it will take that much to acquire Joc.
January 21, 20197 yr 1 hour ago, Dick Allen said: BTW, if anyone is interested, one year subscriptions to The Athletic are $24 today. Where did you see that? I just went to the site and it was listed at regular price.
January 21, 20197 yr 1 minute ago, BrianAnderson said: I think we should wait to see who is traded ... I'm not nearly worried as many people are. These "prospects" rarely turn into much. For every Tatis trade there are 4 more Jeremy Reed trades. That's not to say I'm advocating trading our prospects for 2 years of a stop-gap.. I'm just saying that I don't think it will take that much to acquire Joc. If the entire premise behind this deal is that we should do this because the Dodgers will give us a big discount, count me as confused as to why the Dodgers would do that. If the White Sox have to pay fair value, even if the prospect doesn't become something useful to us in the end, that prospect can be currency down the road. Imagine if the White Sox had traded Jeremy Reed to try to stay competitive in 2003 and the Yankees wound up trading for Freddie Garcia in 2004.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.