37 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Because we're STILL debating the word "great."

Okay, slight internet hyperbole to provoke conversation...gee, that never happens online or specifically around here, right?

So if I said that lots of posters said that Eder would be "very good," then there's no argument at all?

Semantics.

The reason I picked Meidroth is because he's exactly in the same #7-10 prospect range as Eder originally was after the trade.

But hardly anyone would argue Chase is going to be "great."  Or would they run out and buy his currently non-existent jerseys in the Sox souvenir shop?

 

Serviceable is not quite the right word, so "above average" major league production, maybe???

Except Eder was at one point a consensus Top 100 MiLB prospect...something Meidroth has never been classified as.

Whatever the word for Meidroth's CURRENT potential is, it's fair IMO to apply to a prospect at roughly the same level organizationally in a much weaker system two years ago, 45 FV.

I mean if you could actually provide an iota of proof instead of 9 paragraphs of rant, that would be a good place to start.

27 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

I mean if you could actually provide an iota of proof instead of 9 paragraphs of rant, that would be a good place to start.

What is the word you would use to characterize Eder's depiction or characterization in the threads after he was originally acquired from the Marlins?

High potential, high (I won't say unlimited) ceiling...what else?

Not "great," but what word comes right below that on the adjectives/superlatives chart?

There's no way to objectively prove something that's essentially an opinion/non-quantifiable.  It's like normative vs. positive statements in Economics 101.

Edited March 27, 20251 yr by caulfield12

13 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

What is the word you would use to characterize Eder's depiction or characterization in the threads after he was originally acquired from the Marlins?

High potential, high (I won't say unlimited) ceiling...what else?

Not "great," but what word comes right below that on the adjectives/superlatives chart?

There's no way to objectively prove something that's essentially an opinion/non-quantifiable.  It's like normative vs. positive statements in Economics 101.

Do a search 

2 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

Put the thread back up from when he was acquired.

There was a TON of hyperbole about his former prospect rankings and potential before injuries...if you were against trading Burger, you were basically declared an idiot.

Here's your thread:

 

Last chance, Getz…

“Luisangel Acuña earns final spot on Mets' 2025 Opening Day roster: report

Outfielder Alexander Canario is likely the odd man out“

Quote

This likely means that outfielder Alexander Canario is the odd man out and, since he is out of options, will be placed on waivers by noon tomorrow when the Mets' Opening Day roster is due.

Edited March 27, 20251 yr by WhiteSox2023

9 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

Do a search 

There is a lot of great return, Frontline starting pitching prospect, sold high on Burger talk in that thread there, I wasn't a fan of trade myself 

36 minutes ago, 46DidIt said:

There is a lot of great return, Frontline starting pitching prospect, sold high on Burger talk in that thread there, I wasn't a fan of trade myself 

So maybe Eder wasn't "great"...just a great return lol.

You're not going to see a single quote from me that's not on the Burger side of the equation. 

Selling high I'm sure will repeat itself over and over again...questions about Burger's ultimate defensive position, contact/K rates, etc.

How many times did KW and Hahn fall in love with former Top 100 guys from other organizations?

Edited March 27, 20251 yr by caulfield12

7 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

So maybe Eder wasn't "great"...just a great return lol.

You're not going to see a single quote from me that's not on the Burger side of the equation. 

Selling high I'm sure will repeat itself over and over again...questions about Burger's ultimate defensive position, contact/K rates, etc.

I would argue claiming he was a frontline starting prospect is close to equivalent of saying he's going to be great. 

15 minutes ago, 46DidIt said:

I would argue claiming he was a frontline starting prospect is close to equivalent of saying he's going to be great. 

Right.

Then you have to differentiate between ace/TOR and 2/3...and only the former group connoting greatness, but frontline by definition would be one of the 90 best pitchers in the entire world.  That sounds pretty great to me.

Nobody was projecting him back then as a 4/5 or reliever.

Edited March 27, 20251 yr by caulfield12

For god's sake.  I last looked at this thread yesterday evening, and there's still a damn argument about a guy that has nothing to do with who the thread is about.  I can't wait for the season to start later today, and we can argue about how badly the team will suck.

Back to the subject at hand: I imagine some team will claim Canario when he is waived later today.  Not sure it will be the Sox, but there's really no reason not to.

29 minutes ago, hogan873 said:

For god's sake.  I last looked at this thread yesterday evening, and there's still a damn argument about a guy that has nothing to do with who the thread is about.  I can't wait for the season to start later today, and we can argue about how badly the team will suck.

Back to the subject at hand: I imagine some team will claim Canario when he is waived later today.  Not sure it will be the Sox, but there's really no reason not to.

Amen.

 

Reds in Four - X

x.com › RedsInFour › status

23 hours ago · I would have claimed Canario prior to the Austin Hays news. With the Hays injury news rolling in, I think it's a no-brainer.

 

fathom

Posted August 2, 2023  "Callis glowing reviews, you can tell he thinks it was a great Sox trade."

"This is great."

Edited March 27, 20251 yr by caulfield12

just delete this.

Edited March 27, 20251 yr by WestEddy

4 hours ago, 46DidIt said:

I would argue claiming he was a frontline starting prospect is close to equivalent of saying he's going to be great. 

Not going to.  Could be.  Big, big difference.  

Getz better be ready to jettison 33-year old Jankowski for Canario…

 

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

Not going to.  Could be.  Big, big difference.  

Pretty thin semantic line for calling a member of board you moderate a liar if you ask me

"Chris, when you saw the young kid Canario hit waivers, did you think about making the move for the Sox organization?"

 

"No, we never had him in our sights. We really believe that Janikowski, Slater and Taylor will far outweigh any return we could get from a 24 year old, 2 time cast off. These vets we brought in really have something to prove, just watch."

6 minutes ago, 46DidIt said:

Pretty thin semantic line for calling a member of board you moderate a liar if you ask me

Seems pretty obvious to me that there is a difference between even saying this was a "great trade" and "He will be great", but apparently that is just me.

14 minutes ago, Capn12 said:

"Chris, when you saw the young kid Canario hit waivers, did you think about making the move for the Sox organization?"

 

"No, we never had him in our sights. We really believe that Janikowski, Slater and Taylor will far outweigh any return we could get from a 24 year old, 2 time cast off. These vets we brought in really have something to prove, just watch."

Unless I am mistaken, the White Sox have the top waiver claim priority right now due to having the worst win/loss record last year.  So Canario should be with the White Sox within a week, if Getz isn’t a complete and utter moron.

And there is no need for Jankowski as you already have Taylor to backup CF.  And Jankowski being a lefty bat shouldn’t really factor in as he can’t hit for s%*# regardless of his handedness.

Edited March 27, 20251 yr by WhiteSox2023

6 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Seems pretty obvious to me that there is a difference between even saying this was a "great trade" and "He will be great", but apparently that is just me.

Yeah but does that difference amount to a lie. I mean a poster literally referred to him as a front line starter prospect

18 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Unless I am mistaken, the White Sox have the top waiver claim priority right now due to having the worst win/loss record last year.  So Canario should be with the White Sox within a week, if Getz isn’t a complete and utter moron.

And there is no need for Jankowski as you already have Taylor to backup CF.  And Jankowski being a lefty bat shouldn’t really factor in as he can’t hit for s%*# regardless of his handedness.

You simply described a younger version of Jankowski in Greg Jones lol.

16 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

You simply described a younger version of Jankowski in Greg Jones lol.

Jones blows but it was obvious Colas wasn’t going to get another shot, so whatever.

If Jones ever gets the call, the fans in the scout seats are going to get some nice cooling breezes every time he is at the plate.

28 minutes ago, BamaDoc said:

Caulfield hasn't died yet no matter how much the mods try

40 minutes ago, 46DidIt said:

Yeah but does that difference amount to a lie. I mean a poster literally referred to him as a front line starter prospect

I do see it as a purposeful misrepresentation of the facts at hand, especially with a complete unwillingness to go back and verify and also state it as an absolute fact without knowing.

But in this day and age, I guess a lot of people don't really worry about those standards.

17 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

I do see it as a purposeful misrepresentation of the facts at hand, especially with a complete unwillingness to go back and verify and also state it as an absolute fact without knowing.

But in this day and age, I guess a lot of people don't really worry about those standards.

There's no such thing as facts at hand here.

You have the burden of proof if you accuse someone of lying.

If that's the battle you want to fight of all the misrepresentations and mischaracterizations that abound around here, more power to you.

A completely dispassionate observer waded into the so-called evidence and questioned your accusation very succinctly.

 

Edited March 28, 20251 yr by caulfield12