December 17, 20196 yr 1 minute ago, daggins said: Yeah, I don't think Gammons has been right about anything like this for years. Also he very much would receive a report from boston and run with it despite it being so obscenely one-sided for them because he would only consider boston.
December 17, 20196 yr Never forget that Peter Gammons once advocated for the White Sox to be contracted. This was back before 2005 when there was a lot of conversation about wacking one of the Florida clubs.
December 17, 20196 yr 17 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said: Does Shields/Tatis count? No, obviously not Jack but if you want to be that guy so be it.
December 17, 20196 yr 13 minutes ago, smellysox said: Completely agree with this. I really wonder if Boston's goal of shedding salaries is more for a Betts extension rather than moving payroll under the luxury tax. They want to get under the tax and reset so that the Mookie contract doesn't cost them 90 million extra in taxes. I'll believe the Red Sox are going to lose a generational talent - who has a chance to be an all-time great - when I see it happen.
December 17, 20196 yr 15 minutes ago, daggins said: Yeah, I don't think Gammons has been right about anything like this for years. He got Cole to the Yankees, when most were still predicting the Angels.
December 17, 20196 yr 1 minute ago, Perfect Vision said: He got Cole to the Yankees, when most were still predicting the Angels. Every single east coast media piece said the Yankees would not lose out on Cole; to be fair.
December 17, 20196 yr If the White Sox want Boston to eat significantly more of that contract, they will need to include prospects. The Sox have coveted Benintendi since before the Sale trade also. It's not too hard to connect the dots. What Gammons is proposing is ludicrous. However, the White Sox making such a deal, would not surprise me in the least. Probably not both, but I could see them being short-sighted enough to include at least one. Edited December 17, 20196 yr by bachy
December 17, 20196 yr Wait so do we read the gammons tweet as confirmation the Red Sox / white Sox are discussing the price / Ben for our best prospects deal?
December 17, 20196 yr It’s ok to trade prospects. Most prospects don’t pan out. We need to stop treating every single one as untouchable. Edited December 17, 20196 yr by DurhamStance
December 17, 20196 yr 1 minute ago, DurhamStance said: It’s ok to trade prospects. Most prospects don’t pan out. We need to stop treating every single one as untouchable. They should be more untouchable than Jerry's money.
December 17, 20196 yr 3 minutes ago, DurhamStance said: It’s ok to trade prospects. Most prospects don’t pan out. We need to stop treating every single one as untouchable. I don't think I'm doing Vaughn for Beni straight up which is kind of what this is.
December 17, 20196 yr 8 minutes ago, DurhamStance said: It’s ok to trade prospects. Most prospects don’t pan out. We need to stop treating every single one as untouchable. Vaughn I could trade, but certainly not for David Price. Madrigal should be going nowhere.
December 17, 20196 yr 10 minutes ago, bachy said: If the White Sox want Boston to eat significantly more of that contract, they will need to include prospects. The Sox have coveted Benintendi since before the Sale trade also. It's not too hard to connect the dots. What Gammons is proposing is ludicrous. However, the White Sox making such a deal, would not surprise me in the least. Probably not both, but I could see them being short-sighted enough to include at least one. If Benintendi is included, Vaughn is probably going to the Red Sox. That just seems like the reality of the situation, even if it seems like an overpay. I like Vaughn a lot and hate that the Sox could end up trading a good prospect when they just could have signed a free agent, but between Abreu, Grandal, and Collins, the Sox have a group of guys under team control for 3+ years who can give solid production at 1B. The rebuild can be successful even without Vaughn.
December 17, 20196 yr 6 minutes ago, BackDoorBreach said: I don't think I'm doing Vaughn for Beni straight up which is kind of what this is. Nah it's worse, Price has so much negative value that it's more like Vaughn and Madrigal for nothing. fwiw I wouldn't do Vaughn for Beni either.
December 17, 20196 yr 3 minutes ago, Perfect Vision said: If Benintendi is included, Vaughn is probably going to the Red Sox. That just seems like the reality of the situation, even if it seems like an overpay. I like Vaughn a lot and hate that the Sox could end up trading a good prospect when they just could have signed a free agent, but between Abreu, Grandal, and Collins, the Sox have a group of guys under team control for 3+ years who can give solid production at 1B. The rebuild can be successful even without Vaughn. If Vaughn is on the table then trade him for a young starter with team control. Not 34 year old David Price.
December 17, 20196 yr 2 minutes ago, Perfect Vision said: If Benintendi is included, Vaughn is probably going to the Red Sox. That just seems like the reality of the situation, even if it seems like an overpay. I like Vaughn a lot and hate that the Sox could end up trading a good prospect when they just could have signed a free agent, but between Abreu, Grandal, and Collins, the Sox have a group of guys under team control for 3+ years who can give solid production at 1B. The rebuild can be successful even without Vaughn. I agree they can win without Vaughn. I would say that they probably won't win if they give away the most valuable assets in baseball (top-end pre arb talent) for average-to-bad players with less control.
December 17, 20196 yr 2 minutes ago, daggins said: Nah it's worse, Price has so much negative value that it's more like Vaughn and Madrigal for nothing. fwiw I wouldn't do Vaughn for Beni either. I would not trade six controlled seasons of Vaughn for three seasons of Benintendi arbitration control. Just pay a guy like Ozuna for only money, WTF
December 17, 20196 yr 3 minutes ago, YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! said: If Vaughn is on the table then trade him for a young starter with team control. Not 34 year old David Price. I hope this FO is not feeling the pressure and will do something foolish. Not sure I trust they won't.. Edited December 17, 20196 yr by Saufley
December 17, 20196 yr 3 minutes ago, pettie4sox said: This is not a necessary move, tell Boston to pound sand. Exactly what our FO wanted. To sit back and kick the can another year, and make it seem like it is not their fault as the market wasn't there for anything reasonable.
December 17, 20196 yr 2 minutes ago, steveno89 said: I would not trade six controlled seasons of Vaughn for three seasons of Benintendi arbitration control. Just pay a guy like Ozuna for only money, WTF Yeah. I mean, there isn't any reason to do that trade if they are asking for Vaughn. Idc if they trade Vaughn but I'd rather it be for a young SP.
December 17, 20196 yr 5 minutes ago, pettie4sox said: This is not a necessary move, tell Boston to pound sand. You are saying it nicer than I would.
December 17, 20196 yr 26 minutes ago, bachy said: If the White Sox want Boston to eat significantly more of that contract, they will need to include prospects. They shouldn't. And if good prospects are required, they shouldn't make the trade. He's an aging pitcher who wasn't anything special last year and who has pitched 1/2 a season in 2 of the last 3 years. That's the price to pay. Boston may not like it. But the Sox can go free agent route if they don't like it. Most prospects don't pan out. But most GMs understand which ones are real prospects with potential and which are limited. Unfortunately, the Sox GM is not one of the "most" and you can't take the chance with him dealing prospects. He's really bad at the veteran side of the trades too. Edited December 17, 20196 yr by GreenSox
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.