fathom Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 There was talk of the Sox looking at Leake last offseason. With that said, the starting pitching looks very thin if you give up Quintana. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 08:52 PM) Maybe he "Shouldn't be", but he is in decline. I do classify them as declining if they are declining, which he is. Clown trades like that are a prime reason why the Sox have 3 playoff appearances in 15 years despite a top 1/3 payroll under Williams' watch. The second we have a decent prospect, got to move them. You guys want to pay top dollar for players off of bad years. It's like giving our top 2 pitching prospects for Edwin Jackson and his 5+ ERA. How is he declining? Exclude 2014 and you honestly feel you can stand by that statement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Call me skepical of this"inside source". Rock, I believe.20 minutes afte mlbtraderumors comes up with Jay Bruce being available, this comes up. Â I would bet my home the White Sox wouldn't offer Q straight up for Bruce, let alome Q+. He is playing you guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGajewski18 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 08:29 PM) Definitely. Could grow to a very significant deal. Rick is going to be very agressive at the meetings. Â Any idea of a 3rd team that would make sense? Â QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 08:35 PM) Or he lands a RHP along with JB... Â Latos or Cueto come to mind. Don't want any part of Leake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGajewski18 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 08:56 PM) Call me skepical of this"inside source". Rock, I believe.20 minutes afte mlbtraderumors comes up with Jay Bruce being available, this comes up. I would bet my home the White Sox wouldn't offer Q straight up for Bruce, let alome Q+. He is playing you guys.  Agreed, unless we get Cueto back with Bruce, then I would be ok with giving up Quintana. But I really don't even want to do that.  No way I would even do Q for Bruce straight up. I don't see how they have leverage when Bruce is coming off a horribly down year and Quintana has generated two good/great seasons in a row on a great contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigHurt3515 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 IF we give up Quintana (Which defeats the purpose of what the Sox are trying to build) we better get one hell of a deal for him. Q is the most underrated pitcher in the game and has such a great contract and only getting better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliSoxFanViaSWside Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 06:56 PM) Call me skepical of this"inside source". Rock, I believe.20 minutes afte mlbtraderumors comes up with Jay Bruce being available, this comes up. I would bet my home the White Sox wouldn't offer Q straight up for Bruce, let alome Q+. He is playing you guys. On the flip side if its a legit source maybe he can't say anything until the national media gets it first in order to protect a source or something along those lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 08:52 PM) Maybe he "Shouldn't be", but he is in decline. I do classify them as declining if they are declining, which he is. Clown trades like that are a prime reason why the Sox have 3 playoff appearances in 15 years despite a top 1/3 payroll under Williams' watch. The second we have a decent prospect, got to move them. You guys want to pay top dollar for players off of bad years. It's like giving our top 2 pitching prospects for Edwin Jackson and his 5+ ERA. We can't fill our whole roster with 5-6 year cost controlled guys, just not possible. Â And one bad year does not mean he's declining, it means he had one bad year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy the Clown Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Not to have a sour attitude, but I'm not sure I'd claim Bruce for free. Â Can't hit lefties or away from Cincy. Skills deteriorated last year. Â Pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 07:01 PM) On the flip side if its a legit source maybe he can't say anything until the national media gets it first in order to protect a source or something along those lines. He's a legit source. Â Bruce had a bad year, but he's had 3 30/100 seasons prior to that. Let's not act like he's terrible. Â I wouldn't trade Q for Bruce, but for Bruce and the right arm, absolutely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggins Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 For Q+ it better be Bruce + Stephenson and other parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 08:54 PM) How is he declining? Exclude 2014 and you honestly feel you can stand by that statement? And i should exclude 2014...why exactly? He's a medicore OBP ballplayer that Ks a lot. You guys act like he has hall of fame skill. He's an equivalent hitter to, say, Swisher when we acquired him (although the strengths/weaknesses are different). He's a Carlos Lee. What team was giving us top prospects for Carlos Lee? Hell, we traded him of a peak year at the same part in his career for a middle reliever and a journeyman CF. Yet, let's go pay 3 times that price today when he's off of a terrible year? Â The Sox should be trying to get all of the young talent they can get. Edited November 21, 2014 by GreenSox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy the Clown Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 .427 slugging away from Cincy. Pretty sure Semien could do that for us for free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2nd_city_saint787 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Bruce and Latos, Bailey, Stephenson+ or somehow Cueto would certainly be interesting.  Straight up? hell no   Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFutureIsNear Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 a player has 1 bad year and he's pretty much dead to this board. Bruce had a fairly serious knee injury and it affected him all year. You can't just pretend like the guy didn't have an OPS above .800 the 3 years before last. If he was 34 it would be a serious concern, but he's freaking 27 and people are saying things like "deteriorate and decline"? There is such a thing as a down year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 07:23 PM) a player has 1 bad year and he's pretty much dead to this board. Bruce had a fairly serious knee injury and it affected him all year. You can't just pretend like the guy didn't have an OPS above .800 the 3 years before last. If he was 34 it would be a serious concern, but he's freaking 27 and people are saying things like "deteriorate and decline"? There is such a thing as a down year. And honestly, this is one of the few ways you're going to be able to trade for a player with this type of talent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 09:01 PM) We can't fill our whole roster with 5-6 year cost controlled guys, just not possible. Â And one bad year does not mean he's declining, it means he had one bad year. Â It doesn't necessarily mean that he is...but it could mean that he is. Why pay top dollar to accept that risk? The price will be as if he's .800 OPS+hitter (esp if Williams is involved). Get melky if we must "go all in" this year (73 win team going all in is another story). And he wasn't that great to begin with...not nearly as great as people act like he was. High K, mediocre obp. boom/bust type. We don't have enough quality cost controlled player right now. Sox need more. Let Detroit flail away for one more year and then we'll pounce. Edited November 21, 2014 by GreenSox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSpalehoseCWS Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Trading Q for Bruce straight up is just not smart. I like Bruce, but he shouldn't command someone like Q coming off the year he's had (and I do not think Bruce is in decline). Bruce would certainly look nice batting behind Abreu though, talk about an upgrade from the left side of the plate. I still would not give Q up for him though. Â There has to be more to it than that, like the Sox also receiving a SP in return. Whether that comes from the Reds or a 3rd team is what makes this interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Q for Bruce? Â There had better be more coming back with Bruce and the name better not be Phillips either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGajewski18 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 09:42 PM) Q for Bruce? Â There had better be more coming back with Bruce and the name better not be Phillips either. Â The only names I'm interested in if its for Q is in order Cueto, Latos, Frazier, Leake, added on with Bruce. Edited November 21, 2014 by SoxPride18 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggins Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Actually can't comment without knowing the third team involved, and also the "+" Â Bruce is definitely a good target - the Reds are facing a payroll crunch, he is still young, and coming off an injury-induced bad season. He will likely be good in 2015. Â I am very wary of trading Q though. Contracts like that don't grow on trees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 09:43 PM) The only names I'm interested in if its for Q is in order Cueto, Latos, Frazier, Leake, added on with Bruce. I'm with ya. Â Bruce is a nice idea but to be honest, trading Q does not fix the problem of Danks, Noesi and ? as the back three of the rotation. The point would be to ADD a quality starter to Sale and Q, not trade Q. Its not as if the Sox are deep in starting pitching. Â On the other hand, I take this rumor with a grain of salt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunt Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Thanks for sharing this tidbit bucket. I'm really looking forward to seeing where this goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macsandz Posted November 21, 2014 Author Share Posted November 21, 2014 QUOTE (Dunt @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 10:11 PM) Thanks for sharing this tidbit bucket. I'm really looking forward to seeing where this goes. No sweat. Never said it was straight Q for JB, btw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGajewski18 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 10:22 PM) No sweat. Never said it was straight Q for JB, btw. Â Then what did you mean by Q+? Is that with acquiring a pitcher too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.