There are probably a lot of click-throughs in there. People on the Sox site clicking into Castros bio page, watching Castro media, etc. Only a small percentage of MLB.com users are actually going to purchase that massively overpriced garbage they sell on their website, so every bit of concentrated interest in a player is probably seen as pretty important.

 

I mean doesn't that sound just a *little* more plausible than something involving, say, Reptilians and secret underground bases?

No.

I almost picture the person responsible at MLB.com reading this thread while repeating "dance, puppets, dance" in a Mr. Burns-like manner.

Woops I was totally thinking Ramon Castro. Jason Castro probably weirder.

Castro is expensive. We can all reasonably assume the Sox have checked in on him and probably have a good idea of what that price range would be.

Expensive in terms of what the Sox would have to give up, but still relatively cost controlled, which will be key if the club does sign Tanaka. Additionally, the incentive to win earlier moves up and that means the Sox can't realistically go into the season with the s*** they have at catcher. If it were me and Tanaka came, there is no freaking way I have the turds we have behind the plate as our every day catchers. I'd make sure at a minimum, we had someone who called a really good game and could control the running game. Castro could be that guy.

Expensive in terms of what the Sox would have to give up, but still relatively cost controlled, which will be key if the club does sign Tanaka. Additionally, the incentive to win earlier moves up and that means the Sox can't realistically go into the season with the s*** they have at catcher. If it were me and Tanaka came, there is no freaking way I have the turds we have behind the plate as our every day catchers. I'd make sure at a minimum, we had someone who called a really good game and could control the running game. Castro could be that guy.

That would be so amazingly awesome. Especially if we didn't have to trade Q & could build a deal around Johnson. Sale-Tanaka-Q-righty nobody cares about-Danks with Castro behind the plate... f*** yeah.

That would be so amazingly awesome. Especially if we didn't have to trade Q & could build a deal around Johnson. Sale-Tanaka-Q-righty nobody cares about-Danks with Castro behind the plate... f*** yeah.

 

I agree with you. If Hahn were to manage to get Tanaka, I would definitely build a package around Erik Johnson for Jason Castro. But even without Castro, with the potential of adding Tanaka, a rotation of Sale, Tanaka, Quintana, Danks and Johnson. Tell me that's not one of the better rotations in baseball.

Expensive in terms of what the Sox would have to give up, but still relatively cost controlled, which will be key if the club does sign Tanaka. Additionally, the incentive to win earlier moves up and that means the Sox can't realistically go into the season with the s*** they have at catcher. If it were me and Tanaka came, there is no freaking way I have the turds we have behind the plate as our every day catchers. I'd make sure at a minimum, we had someone who called a really good game and could control the running game. Castro could be that guy.

The more I think about it, the more I think Castro (or a similar type of Catcher) will be on the White Sox IF the Sox are able to land Tanaka. Getting someone like Tanaka is just a huge boost to the whole win now movement (as evident by how much the White Sox would wind up paying to get him), and if you are trying to win now, you can't go into the season with Flowers/Phegley/Nieto as your options at catcher, especially not since this team is also filled with question marks all over the place.

 

Jason Castro sure seems to fit the mold of what the White Sox want on offense (lefty bat with some power, and has potential to cut down on his k's and increase walk rate) and fits the age requirements for building the contender. I would probably be more than willing to see a Quintana for Castro trade IF Tanaka is on the southside. If Tanaka isn't with the White Sox, then it would be a lateral move. If you can keep Quintana and still make a deal, that's awesome, but I wouldn't want to see either Johnson, Danish, or Semien involved in any deal, and that probably isn't a realistic scenario to not involve any of those 4 and still make a deal.

The more I think about it, the more I think Castro (or a similar type of Catcher) will be on the White Sox IF the Sox are able to land Tanaka. Getting someone like Tanaka is just a huge boost to the whole win now movement (as evident by how much the White Sox would wind up paying to get him), and if you are trying to win now, you can't go into the season with Flowers/Phegley/Nieto as your options at catcher, especially not since this team is also filled with question marks all over the place.

 

Jason Castro sure seems to fit the mold of what the White Sox want on offense (lefty bat with some power, and has potential to cut down on his k's and increase walk rate) and fits the age requirements for building the contender. I would probably be more than willing to see a Quintana for Castro trade IF Tanaka is on the southside. If Tanaka isn't with the White Sox, then it would be a lateral move. If you can keep Quintana and still make a deal, that's awesome, but I wouldn't want to see either Johnson, Danish, or Semien involved in any deal, and that probably isn't a realistic scenario to not involve any of those 4 and still make a deal.

Personally I don't think it's realistic to envision Castro here without including at least 2 of those guys. If there's no Q in the deal then it's going to have to come out of the farm.

 

Just think, if YOU had that guy and then looked at our system, what would YOU demand? You probably aren't going to accept walking away with a couple Trayce Thompsons and a Mitchell or two. IMO Hawkins/Johnson/Beck/Danish/MJohnson/Semien/Barnum - you're probably looking at 3 of those guys and then something like Snodgress or Webb getting added to it.

 

Right now that would be tough to swallow, but if there happens to be a Tanaka deal.... that changes things considerably.

 

You're looking at 2 draft picks coming up, one #3 and the other as high as your typical supplemental first used to be. We'll get a third pick in the top-100 also. AND we're going to max out our INTL budget. AND if Danks comes back to full health, we'll likely be trading him for quality as well. We could afford to make a deal with Houston and replenish what we'd take out assuming Houston likes our guys enough. It's always hard to give up talented prospects, but what are the chances that anyone we'd give up would become as good as Castro is now, and what are the chances the guys we'd give up would even be regarded as highly as those which will be added to the system 5-6 months from now? You always have to give up something good to get something good.

Personally I don't think it's realistic to envision Castro here without including at least 2 of those guys. If there's no Q in the deal then it's going to have to come out of the farm.

 

Just think, if YOU had that guy and then looked at our system, what would YOU demand? You probably aren't going to accept walking away with a couple Trayce Thompsons and a Mitchell or two. IMO Hawkins/Johnson/Beck/Danish/MJohnson/Semien/Barnum - you're probably looking at 3 of those guys and then something like Snodgress or Webb getting added to it.

 

Right now that would be tough to swallow, but if there happens to be a Tanaka deal.... that changes things considerably.

 

You're looking at 2 draft picks coming up, one #3 and the other as high as your typical supplemental first used to be. We'll get a third pick in the top-100 also. AND we're going to max out our INTL budget. AND if Danks comes back to full health, we'll likely be trading him for quality as well. We could afford to make a deal with Houston and replenish what we'd take out assuming Houston likes our guys enough. It's always hard to give up talented prospects, but what are the chances that anyone we'd give up would become as good as Castro is now, and what are the chances the guys we'd give up would even be regarded as highly as those which will be added to the system 5-6 months from now? You always have to give up something good to get something good.

 

If the Sox sign Tanaka, I'd easily give up a Beck/Danish/MJohnson/Barnum

 

Hell, I'd be willing to bite on trading Anderson.

 

EJ and Semien are just the ones I don't want to trade. But if it comes down to EJ for Castro, straight up swap, then I might do it. Then I'm praying Beck/Danish fly through the system and can be ready for call-ups.

Frankly, if the Sox sign Tanaka, I have no problem dealing Johnson plus leftovers for Castro. The rotation is Sale, Tanaka, Quintana, Danks, Rienzo/Surkamp/Paulino. You have 2 additional starters and all 3 #5 guys have a bit of upside. That's manageable.

Frankly, if the Sox sign Tanaka, I have no problem dealing Johnson plus leftovers for Castro. The rotation is Sale, Tanaka, Quintana, Danks, Rienzo/Surkamp/Paulino. You have 2 additional starters and all 3 #5 guys have a bit of upside. That's manageable.

 

Definitely. And that's exactly what I'm hoping will happen. And if it does, I am suddenly reasonably optimistic for 2014.

Not that I should get ahead of myself, if we signed Tanaka, Quintana should be the guy to go. Not Erik Johnson.

 

Why?

There's no way I'm keeping Erik Johnson over Quintana. You can probably get Castro for Johnson and a couple of OK prospects who will ultimately mean nothing to the Sox but might contribute at the MLB level. You may not even get Castro for Quintana, and he's proven far more at the MLB level.

Selling high on and striking when the iron is hot on a guy who lacks an out pitch. I personally think that Quintana would bring back much more and Erik Johnson has a higher ceiling. Guys like Quintana don't always flourish after going through the league a couple times.

 

His fastball is his out pitch. He mixes his stuff well enough that you can't sit on the fastball, but then he pops it at you around 92-94. He also has excellent command and control. There are some arguments against him, but ultimately I think he's a fantastic pitcher.

 

I have no idea what Johnson's ceiling is. I've seen him anywhere between a 2 and a long-term innings eating #4 starter. His stuff wasn't overly impressive last year either.

Not that I should get ahead of myself, if we signed Tanaka, Quintana should be the guy to go. Not Erik Johnson.

 

I don't think so because we are only HOPING that Erik can be as good as Q eventually.

 

On a rebuilding team that is a few pieces away, okay, I get dumping the better talent for the better haul. But if we add Tanaka, we are honestly just a catcher away from being a possible contender. And if you trade Q to get that catcher, the you've made a new hole somewhere else. And for a team on the cusp, you don't get anywhere by moving holes around.

Edited January 20, 201412 yr by Chilihead90

I expect to be in the minority in this argument and that's fine. People respect the last two years Quintana has put together and rightfully so. I know it's a big if, but if Erik Johnson pans out, he will be a much more valuable commodity than Quintana as soon as next year.

 

Honestly, I have no problem trading Quintana, but again, I want to aim higher than Castro. Right now, he's a very valuable #3 starter at the worst. That has a ton of value on the open market. Castro does too, but I think you can get him for Johnson+, while I think you can get more than him for Quintana+. Feel me?

Jose Quintana put up a 3.7 WAR last season. That's top 25 in baseball. He was in the same rankings as Madison Bumgarner, Homer Bailey, Patrick Corbin, and Jordan Zimmerman. These are all very good #2 type pitchers. I don't know if Erik Johnson will ever get there, but he certainly won't get there in the near future.

Jose Quintana put up a 3.7 WAR last season. That's top 25 in baseball. He was in the same rankings as Madison Bumgarner, Homer Bailey, Patrick Corbin, and Jordan Zimmerman. These are all very good #2 type pitchers. I don't know if Erik Johnson will ever get there, but he certainly won't get there in the near future.

 

I don't personally think he's a better pitcher than most of those guys though. I agree with raBBit that it's selling high, which is what you like to do. I think he's closer to a 3 WAR starter, while those guys I all view as 4 WAR starters. There's not a huge difference, but it's there. In any given year, though, those can change depending on which way the wind is blowing.

I think that Hahns next move is to play "99 Problems" on his itouch

I don't personally think he's a better pitcher than most of those guys though. I agree with raBBit that it's selling high, which is what you like to do. I think he's closer to a 3 WAR starter, while those guys I all view as 4 WAR starters. There's not a huge difference, but it's there. In any given year, though, those can change depending on which way the wind is blowing.

 

If we don't land Tanaka, then I am good with moving Quitana, because I don't think we'd be close enough to compete. But if we DO get Tanaka, then I want that front 4 of the rotation in tack, then you trade off extra assets to fill our last real big hole, catcher.

At this point I'm not moving Quintana or Johnson whether we land Tanaka or we don't but that's just me.

I think that Hahns next move is to play "99 Problems" on his itouch

99 problems but pitching ain't one

Just generally and not necessarily referring to this exact conversation, but why is it so often assumed that "selling high" means trading a quality, established, MLB-proven player whereas the trading of a valued prospect who has done absolutely nothing is not? Assuming any particular prospect is going to continue to increase, increase, increase in value while betting that a proven player (especially a young pre-arb one) is never going to get better or is never going to be valued as highly again is a pretty bad series of bets and assumptions. Check the "humility thread" for tons of examples of this.

 

I'd trade prospects over Q in a heartbeat if I had to. And I like EJ & Beck a lot, and I love Danish, but if you get Tanaka - even if you trade all 3 of those guys plus a position player and get Castro - what are the odds that even one of them is going to end up as good as Castro or better? Certainly it is possible, and they are all definitely quality pitching prospects, but the odds are that at least 1 of these guys is going to totally suck or never make it, and at least 1 will be sent out in a trade or removed from the 40-man roster at some point and made available through waivers. There's no reason to believe that any single one won't make it, but there's also no reason to believe that the odds are going to overwhelmingly work in our favor. They never do. Even Sale: given the number of huge ceiling pitchers we've drafted over the last couple decades, the fact that we've come up with one ace pretty much meets or falls short of whatever our odds of drafting and developing an ace would be.

The thing about Quintana is that is very likely at his absolute peak. He's already gained velocity and his control is his best attribute, so if he's going to regress at all, its' almost certainly going to be downward. Best case scenario for him is maintain.

The thing about Quintana is that is very likely at his absolute peak. He's already gained velocity and his control is his best attribute, so if he's going to regress at all, its' almost certainly going to be downward. Best case scenario for him is maintain.

The good news is generally when you regress, it is downward.