PDA

View Full Version : The Quentin Trade May Have Been Fairer Than Most Think


Lillian
08-27-2008, 09:52 AM
I love Carlos. However, everyone seems so sure that this trade is the best, most lopsided trade the Sox have ever made. In fact, I heard someone say that last night on Chicago Tribune Live. Such assessments may be just a little premature.
The guy the Sox traded to Arizona for Quentin is Chris Carter. He was later sent to Oakland for Danny Haren. Carter was a very highly regarded prospect, and is having a very good year at age 21. He's leading the advanced A California League in both homers (37) and RBI's (100). He does have a ton of strikeouts, and is only hitting .259, but he also walks a lot. For a guy his age, he seems to be developing very nicely.
It may turn out to be a deal that benefits both trading partners, in this case, all three trading partners, in the long run.
That said, of course I'm thrilled with TCQ, and Carter probably won't make an impact at the Major League level for at least a couple more years.
I just thought that it might be interesting to view the trade a little more objectively.

oeo
08-27-2008, 09:56 AM
We got an MVP candidate for an A player. It doesn't matter what Carter amounts to, it was very, very lopsided.

CashMan
08-27-2008, 09:57 AM
Wasn't TCQ, a 5 tool(did somebody say tool) prospect?

UofCSoxFan
08-27-2008, 09:58 AM
I love Carlos. However, everyone seems so sure that this trade is the best, most lopsided trade the Sox have ever made. In fact, I heard someone say that last night on Chicago Tribune Live. Such assessments may be just a little premature.
The guy the Sox traded to Arizona for Quentin is Chris Carter. He was later sent to Oakland for Danny Haren. Carter was a very highly regarded prospect, and is having a very good year at age 21. He's leading the advanced A California League in both homers (37) and RBI's (100). He does have a ton of strikeouts, and is only hitting .259, but he also walks a lot. For a guy his age, he seems to be developing very nicely.
It may turn out to be a deal that benefits both trading partners, in this case, all three trading partners, in the long run.
That said, of course I'm thrilled with TCQ, and Carter probably won't make an impact at the Major League level for at least a couple more years.
I just thought that it might be interesting to view the trade a little more objectively.

It's a fair point. We did give up a good prospect for Q. Still Carter is a minimum of 2 years away whereas Q is only 4 years older and already putting up huge numbers. Carter would have to continue to progress at a rapid pace to equal with Q has aleady done. Stil Carter has been traded for an MVP candidate and a Cy Young caliber pitcher before the age of 22, which should tell you something.

The fact of the matter is the Dback had no room for Q and wanted to get something in return. Had they known Q was going to be this good, they probabably could have gotten a ton more.

CashMan
08-27-2008, 09:58 AM
We got an MVP candidate for an A player. It doesn't matter what Carter amounts to, it was very, very lopsided.

I concur. I think everyone knew he had power, but he is 21 and hitting 260 in A ball? We don't need an Adam Dunn.

CashMan
08-27-2008, 09:59 AM
The fact of the matter is the Dback had no room for Q and wanted to get something in return. Had they known Q was going to be this good, they probabably could have gotten a ton more.

Or kept him.

btrain929
08-27-2008, 09:59 AM
You just like Chris Carter because his stats are very similar to your husband's stats, Brad Eldred :tongue:

oeo
08-27-2008, 10:01 AM
The fact of the matter is the Dback had no room for Q and wanted to get something in return. Had they known Q was going to be this good, they probabably could have gotten a ton more.

Which is exactly why it was lopsided and always will be, no matter the kind of impact Carter makes. You don't trade just one A player for an MVP candidate everyday.

Let's just say, I'm not going to be crying if Chris Carter becomes a perennial All Star.

munchman33
08-27-2008, 10:02 AM
I love Carlos. However, everyone seems so sure that this trade is the best, most lopsided trade the Sox have ever made. In fact, I heard someone say that last night on Chicago Tribune Live. Such assessments may be just a little premature.
The guy the Sox traded to Arizona for Quentin is Chris Carter. He was later sent to Oakland for Danny Haren. Carter was a very highly regarded prospect, and is having a very good year at age 21. He's leading the advanced A California League in both homers (37) and RBI's (100). He does have a ton of strikeouts, and is only hitting .259, but he also walks a lot. For a guy his age, he seems to be developing very nicely.
It may turn out to be a deal that benefits both trading partners, in this case, all three trading partners, in the long run.
That said, of course I'm thrilled with TCQ, and Carter probably won't make an impact at the Major League level for at least a couple more years.
I just thought that it might be interesting to view the trade a little more objectively.

That's a lot of homers for A ball....but still. At best, he'll be an MVP type player. Whereas Quentin IS very likely to already be the MVP of the league already.

voodoochile
08-27-2008, 10:03 AM
Or kept him.

Oh definitely. Would you trade Q right now? If so for what? 2 SP and a leadoff CF?

The Dbacks simply wore out on Q's injuries and had a stocked OF situation. Given the year Chris Young had last year and the other young players they have in the OF, they simply figured they'd get something for him.

Now on the other hand, do you figure Beane is kicking himself for taking Carter instead of Q in the Haren trade?

doublem23
08-27-2008, 10:05 AM
:?:

If you want to talk about a trade that is the classic "win-win" for each team, you're talking about a deal like the Podsednik/Lee trade. We won in the short term, as without Scotty Pods' great '05 season, the Sox likely don't win the World Series, but Carlos Lee has been a much better MLB player over the long-term, while Podsednik has been relegated to being a bench-warmer on a bad Rockies team.

Regardless of what Carter does in his career, the Sox fleeced the Diamondbacks. Anytime you can get a guy putting up the numbers TCQ is for a kid still in A-ball, that's a no-brainer. The road from High-A ball to the Majors is littered with power-hitting prospects who fizzled. The Sox essentially traded 3 uncertain years waiting for Carter to develop for a player who has immediately anchored this lineup.

Totally and completely one-sided.

asindc
08-27-2008, 10:17 AM
Oh definitely. Would you trade Q right now? If so for what? 2 SP and a leadoff CF?

The Dbacks simply wore out on Q's injuries and had a stocked OF situation. Given the year Chris Young had last year and the other young players they have in the OF, they simply figured they'd get something for him.

Now on the other hand, do you figure Beane is kicking himself for taking Carter instead of Q in the Haren trade?

Excellent point. For all the talk from statheads about what a genius Beane is, KW beat him straight-up on this one, as well as the Dbacks. No way does Beane not take TCQ if he had made a correct assessment about him, and no way do the Dbacks trade him if they had done the same.

Chalk up another notch on KW's belt.:gulp:

Lillian
08-27-2008, 10:19 AM
You just like Chris Carter because his stats are very similar to your husband's stats, Brad Eldred :tongue:

I hope that your entire post is all in jest. If so, :D:

dickallen15
08-27-2008, 10:26 AM
Carter is in a hitter's league. He may turn out great, but Quentin is great.

btrain929
08-27-2008, 10:26 AM
I hope that your entire post is all in jest. If so, :D:

Indeed.

sox1970
08-27-2008, 10:31 AM
With the numbers even, I'll take the guy doing it at the major league level.

If there's a team that should be worried about trading Carter, it's the Diamondbacks. They already blew it by trading Quentin.

Chez
08-27-2008, 10:36 AM
With the numbers even, I'll take the guy doing it at the major league level.

If there's a team that should be worried about trading Carter, it's the Diamondbacks. They already blew it by trading Quentin.

Yeah but TCQ for Haren isn't that bad a trade for AZ. Carlos is having a MVP type season but it's not like AZ got slop back when they spun Carter off to Oakland.

Lillian
08-27-2008, 10:36 AM
Of course, the Sox have the indisputable edge in the trade, so far, and I acknowledged that. My point is simply that it is too soon to conclude that it was a totally lopsided trade, because Carter is so young.
It is true that because Carlos has produced so well already, it makes the trade overwhelmingly to our advantage. However, couldn't it ultimately become a fair trade, if Carter becomes a big star in his own right?
Do you just automatically assume that because our guy is a MVP candidate, and the player traded away is only in A Ball, that there is no chance for this to ever be regarded as anything but lopsided? I don't disagree with that view, but I'm just wondering how organizations view such transactions. In other words, do Byrnes and especially Beane, conclude that it was a bad deal for their teams? Might Beane instead be thinking that it's too early to make that judgement, and that the deal might be later viewed as reasonable, if Carter develops into the player that he must envision?

KyWhiSoxFan
08-27-2008, 10:37 AM
This is a one-sided debate. All you have to do is ask: Would you trade Quentin for Carter right now. The answer, of course, is no. Quentin, if he stays healthy, will be a force for the Sox for the next 6-10 years. He is having the type of season you dream about when you bring someone up: A guy who can carry the team and is an MVP-caliber player. There are only a handful of players this year who are in the same sentence as Quentin.

Carter, at this point, would seem to be more like a Chris Young type of player at best, without the speed: A lot of power but a poor average. Players who cannot hit for a high average in A ball are not good candidates to hit for a high average when they get to the majors (to say nothing that he still has to go through AA and AAA). It does not happen, or at least not often.

If Carter were still in the Sox system, you would be praying he continued to develop and would be able to reach the major leagues. In Quentin, he is not only there already but an MVP candidate.

doublem23
08-27-2008, 10:39 AM
Might Beane instead be thinking that it's too early to make that judgement, and that the deal might be later viewed as reasonable, if Carter develops into the player that he must envision?

Billy Beane is banking he'll be able to trade Chris Carter away in 4 years for a boatload of prospects.

:fobbgod:
Oakland A's... 2020 World Champs... Mark it down!

35th&Shields
08-27-2008, 10:42 AM
I just thought that it might be interesting to view the trade a little more objectively.

You can view this trade through objectively, subjectively or by any other standard you want to create, this is the best trade in the history of the White Sox. Carter will, at best, be a major league player one day. At best. Carlos Quentin is currently a favorite to win the MVP on a playoff-caliber team and has a bright future ahead of him.

Lillian
08-27-2008, 10:45 AM
With the numbers even, I'll take the guy doing it at the major league level.

If there's a team that should be worried about trading Carter, it's the Diamondbacks. They already blew it by trading Quentin.

That's a good point. If Carter becomes a star like Quentin, that would mean that they traded both of them for Haren. Now that would be lopsided, especially since they did not get a long affordable contract with Haren. They have since signed him to an extension through 2012, with an option for 2013 at $15.5M. For that kind of money they could have just bought a Free Agent pitcher, and kept either Quentin or Carter.

btrain929
08-27-2008, 10:47 AM
It will be a one-sided trade now and forever because the team we traded with, Arizona, won't reap the benefits if Carter does become a stud. They traded him already for Haren. Now if Haren wins 4 CY Youngs in the next 6 years, when you can consider it helping both teams. But Arizona traded TCQ and traded Chris. Lopsided.

guillen4life13
08-27-2008, 10:47 AM
I just shudder to think of the day TCQ asks to be paid for his performance. He is going to get a very big contract (and I hope it's with the White Sox).

As of right now, the trade is definitely in our favor. Barring a career ending/changing injury for Quentin or a drastic drop off in performance, the Sox still will be the victors. Carter might become a very good hitter, but he never had the tools Quentin has/had. You just need to give it time.

I think a Carlos' character and work ethic also brings a lot of value to the team. It sets a good example. I don't know much at all about Carter outside of the stats.

jabrch
08-27-2008, 10:47 AM
Billy Beane is banking he'll be able to trade Chris Carter away in 4 years for a boatload of prospects.

:fobbgod:
Oakland A's... 2020 World Champs... Mark it down!

Exactly...

Carter is hitting .259 in A ball. That doesn't bode well for his future. The road to the Hall of Fame is littered with the carcasses of sluggers with high K and low batting averages in Single A ball.

There is no circumstance you can argue, after nearly one season, that this was a fair trade. We got an MVP candidate for a guy unable to hit for average in Single A.

cws05champ
08-27-2008, 10:48 AM
I just thought that it might be interesting to view the trade a little more objectively.
Ok...take us die hard White Sox fans out of the equation. You don't think any other GM, Baseball scouts or fans of another team would say this was a lopsided deal? Of course we are all biased...but it's not just us saying this, it is EVERYONE.
Evaluating an A ball prospect with the power #'s he is putting up in a hitters league is not a good idea either.

Bucky F. Dent
08-27-2008, 10:49 AM
We gave up a guy with prospects for having success in the league for a guy actually having success in the league. I'm feeling pretty satisfied with the way this deal turned out for us.

doublem23
08-27-2008, 10:49 AM
That's a good point. If Carter becomes a star like Quentin, that would mean that they traded both of them for Haren. Now that would be lopsided, especially since they did not get a long affordable contract with Haren. They have since signed him to an extension through 2012, with an option for 2013 at $15.5M. For that kind of money they could have just bought a Free Agent pitcher, and kept either Quentin or Carter.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/harenda01.shtml

Danny Haren is having a pretty good year. :scratch:

The team that has the most to lose in this Quentin/Haren/Carter triangle are the A's. If the D-backs were willing to deal Quentin for Carter straight up then you can logically assume they would have done the same Haren deal, with Quentin going to Oakland and not the Sox. Haren is an excellent pitcher. Quentin and Haern are both critical pieces of ours and Arizona's respective puzzle.

If Carter doesn't turn into a stud, then the A's look like idiots.

Lillian
08-27-2008, 10:54 AM
Exactly...

Carter is hitting .259 in A ball. That doesn't bode well for his future. The road to the Hall of Fame is littered with the carcasses of sluggers with high K and low batting averages in Single A ball.

There is no circumstance you can argue, after nearly one season, that this was a fair trade. We got an MVP candidate for a guy unable to hit for average in Single A.

Of course you're right. I wan't arguing that it was a fair trade, but only that it seemed a little premature to declare it an incredibly lopsided trade, because it is too early to assess Carter's future.
That kind of judgement can be made much more easily when it involves trading away an aging former star for a young player like Carlos. The answer becomes very clear immediately when the young player develops into a star. However, when you have two young players, I thought it might be more reasonable to delay the verdict.
That said, I think I'm becoming convinced that it was indeed incredibly lopsided.
Who cares what Carter does in a few years? I do love TCQ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Domeshot17
08-27-2008, 10:57 AM
I'll take the guy who leads the mlb in homers with 100 rbis over the guy who leads single a in homers with 100 rbis 6 days a week and twice on sunday.

No one said Carter would be a bad prospect, and some even groaned about the deal when it happened. But he is what he is, a prospect. A big tell sign in the minors if a guy makes it in the pros or not is his K totals. That is just how it is. Carter looks good, but he would have to be Pujols good to make the trade back in AZ's/Oak's favor (depending how you look at it) and really have to be somewhere along the lines of Morneau/Youklis/Berkman good to have it come closer to even (but Quentin is having a better year than all 3 of them too).

EndemicSox
08-27-2008, 11:09 AM
I'd be shocked if Carter doesn't become a pretty damn good MLB player, probably an all-star calibre player. With that being said, Quentin is at that level right now, so there really isn't anything to worry about.

voodoochile
08-27-2008, 11:10 AM
Yeah but TCQ for Haren isn't that bad a trade for AZ. Carlos is having a MVP type season but it's not like AZ got slop back when they spun Carter off to Oakland.

No, it was Carter and like 4 other top prospects for Haren. I don't remember their names and I have no idea what they are doing, but it was a LOT more than Carter alone. Now if Beane had managed 4 top prospects and an MVP candidate in his first full healthy season in the majors for Haren, it would be a major blowout in his favor.

CashMan
08-27-2008, 11:19 AM
I'd be shocked if Carter doesn't become a pretty damn good MLB player, probably an all-star calibre player. With that being said, Quentin is at that level right now, so there really isn't anything to worry about.

Based on what? Eldred has good power numbers at the AAA level, does that mean he will be an all-star at the MLB level? Carter is 21 in A ball and has a .260 BA.

voodoochile
08-27-2008, 11:23 AM
These are the players Arizona sent Oakland:

Pitchers: Brett Anderson, Greg Smith and Dana Eveland
Outfielders: Carlos Gonzalez and Aaron Cunningham
First baseman: Chris Carter

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071214&content_id=2326595&vkey=hotstove2007&fext=.jsp

Now again, I don't know how those players other than Carter are doing, but replace Carter with TCQ and then consider the deal.

Heck, given their salary levels, Haren for TCQ straight up is probably a solid deal for both sides and might favor the team who gets TCQ because they'd have $15M to spend on pitching.

jabrch
08-27-2008, 11:24 AM
Of course you're right. I wan't arguing that it was a fair trade, but only that it seemed a little premature to declare it an incredibly lopsided trade, because it is too early to assess Carter's future.

It is not too early. I can easily judge the trade TODAY based on the data available. That judgement may change, but if you take a snapshot today, we got an MVP candidate for a guy who is not hitting for average and striking out a ton in SINGLE A. That's lopsided no matter how you choose to paint it.

jabrch
08-27-2008, 11:26 AM
I'd be shocked if Carter doesn't become a pretty damn good MLB player, probably an all-star calibre player.

There are literally dozens of Chris Carters out there.

There are very few Quentins (MVP candidates making 500K) out there.

voodoochile
08-27-2008, 11:29 AM
There are literally dozens of Chris Carters out there.

There are very few Quentins (MVP candidates making 500K) out there.

You also need to factor in their work ethics. I have no idea if Carter is busting his hump to get better, but every article written about TCQ praises his single-minded dedication to getting better. That's a scary thought for the rest of the AL.

soxfanatlanta
08-27-2008, 11:35 AM
TCQ only has seven stolen bases: he's worthless.

:redneck

delben91
08-27-2008, 11:44 AM
Carlos Quentin is certainly no Jeremy Reed. :(::(::(:

oeo
08-27-2008, 11:45 AM
Do you just automatically assume that because our guy is a MVP candidate, and the player traded away is only in A Ball, that there is no chance for this to ever be regarded as anything but lopsided?

Yes.

Carter was traded alone as a A-ball player. It does not matter if Carter ever becomes an All Star, it will always be lopsided. You don't trade an A player for an MLB player straight up unless that MLB player sucks. That's why it will always be lopsided.

Sox Supporter
08-27-2008, 11:52 AM
If we want to play this game, here goes: what would you think if it was announced today that Kenny W has traded TCQ for Carter? We all know what the reaction would be: a meltdown of Chernobyl proportions, and rightfully so.

jabrch
08-27-2008, 11:54 AM
If we want to play this game, here goes: what would you think if it was announced today that Kenny W has traded TCQ for Carter? We all know what the reaction would be: a meltdown of Chernobyl proportions, and rightfully so.

Great point!

voodoochile
08-27-2008, 11:55 AM
If we want to play this game, here goes: what would you think if it was announced today that Kenny W has traded TCQ for Carter? We all know what the reaction would be: a meltdown of Chernobyl proportions, and rightfully so.

Yeah, somehow I doubt people would be touting Carter's great A-ball numbers if that were the case...

At some point earlier this year, there was a link to a Dbacks fan forum (Snake Pit?) in TB. On the home page they had ripped off the credo from the movie Fight Club and posted it: "The first rule of Snake Pit is we don't talk about Carlos Quentin. The Second rule of Snake Pit is we don't talk about Carlos Quentin."

It's since been replaced, but it was freaking hilarious at the time.

TDog
08-27-2008, 12:01 PM
Chris Carter visited Modesto last week. Against the Nuts, he went 0-for-8 in two games with five strikeouts. It is true he does have 37 home runs and 100 RBIs as the Ports' regular designated hitter. He leads the California League in home runs, strikeouts and games played, but he starteed the year in the California League and hasn't been promoted, as other players have. He has struck out 149 times in 131 games and is hitting just .259. He doesn't seem to be learning a position.

I was thinking Carter is in the mold of Jack Cust, or even Frank Thomas on the A's side of his career (because he is in the A's system; Jim Thome also is such a player) -- a power threat with a high strikeout rate who walks a lot so that he gets on base a lot more than his low batting average would lead you to believe. But Carter has only walked 70 times. He had a great June, though, hitting over .300 and slugging over .700, but that followed an atrocious May where he finished the month with a season average of .210. I am guessing the A's expected more from Carter, who hit .291 with Kanapolis last season.

If you want to celebrate Carter's rising star, his jersey number is 33. He will be in the California League playoffs as Stockton has already clinched a spot, despite their uninspired second-half play. Carlos Quentin still has some work to do to lead the White Sox to the major league postseason. If Quentin leads the American League in home runs, I imagine the Stockton Record will run a story about the California League home run leader being traded for him. But, seriously, projecting any minor leaguer out to a future major league MVP candidate is a longshot.

All this talk involving minor league home runs and Stockton reminds me of Stockton native Ken Hottman. In 1970, when Bill Melton set a meant-to-be-broken White Sox team record by hitting 33 home runs, Ken Hottman was hitting 35 home runs for the Tucson Toros, the White Sox AAA Pacific Coast League affiliate. I once asked Bill Melton about Hottman. Melton said he had never heard of him. Such was the impression Hottman made, although the two would have played together in spring training and the Baseball Reference reveals that Melton got two hits in the 1971 game in Oakland where Hottman, the starting leftfielder, got his first major league hit. Hottman would only get one more hit in his major league career. Both of his hits were singles, although he did lead the Pacific Coast League in home runs in 1970.

Tragg
08-27-2008, 12:02 PM
We got an MVP candidate for an A player. It doesn't matter what Carter amounts to, it was very, very lopsided.
That's true..and there's also a time value involved...we got Quentin's benefits immediately...whatever they get from Carter, it's years removed.

By the same token, the Garland trade wasn't so lopsided in our favor as some suggested - we had to wait several years for the benefits.

At the time I thought that we gave up a better prospect for Richar than we did for Quentin. We'll see.

kittle42
08-27-2008, 12:19 PM
I'd be shocked if Carter doesn't become a pretty damn good MLB player, probably an all-star calibre player. With that being said, Quentin is at that level right now, so there really isn't anything to worry about.

I'd say your likelihood of being shocked is pretty high.

AnkleSox
08-27-2008, 12:24 PM
If you want to celebrate Carter's rising star, his jersey number is 33.

Well if he takes after Aaron Rowand he's destined to be a first ballot Hall of Famer!!

Britt Burns
08-27-2008, 12:31 PM
I agree that TCQ for Carter is lopsided, but as Carter was a big a piece of getting Haren, I don't think the D-Backs got totally fleeced. Still, one more unbelievable trade for KW!

cws05champ
08-27-2008, 01:51 PM
Yeah, somehow I doubt people would be touting Carter's great A-ball numbers if that were the case...

At some point earlier this year, there was a link to a Dbacks fan forum (Snake Pit?) in TB. On the home page they had ripped off the credo from the movie Fight Club and posted it: "The first rule of Snake Pit is we don't talk about Carlos Quentin. The Second rule of Snake Pit is we don't talk about Carlos Quentin."

It's since been replaced, but it was freaking hilarious at the time.
I read that...it was great...I also read through a thread on there where they went over all the offseason moves (in Mid June I think). Instead of a paragraph summary of TCQ it was just a picture of a guy beating a dead horse. :rolling:

hawkjt
08-27-2008, 01:58 PM
Maybe Carter pans out, but we have a known quantity in Carlos.
Carlos is a complete player,great eye at the plate,runs the bases well, fields well, throws well, and hits a ton.
Plus, he is an extremely high character person..which bodes well for the long term. I love everything about Carlos.

BadBobbyJenks
08-27-2008, 02:07 PM
Nope sorry, a single A 21 year old for the American League MVP is a heist everyday and twice on Wednesday.

Carolina Kenny
08-27-2008, 02:44 PM
This trade is so dammgummit good that it almost makes up for losing, Norm Cash and Earl Battey.

pmck003
08-27-2008, 02:47 PM
Yes.

Carter was traded alone as a A-ball player. It does not matter if Carter ever becomes an All Star, it will always be lopsided. You don't trade an A player for an MLB player straight up unless that MLB player sucks. That's why it will always be lopsided.

I agree that it will always be lopsided. Even if Carter pans out to a great player, its kinda like the lottery options of getting a large cash sum now or annual payments. As long as you have a little bit of self control/reason, its smarter to take the lump sum even though it appears to be less than the annual sum. If you put a reasonable amount in savings/investments, you should come out ahead of the annual and be able to enjoy it quicker and have more options in how to enjoy it. Having Quentin now gives the Sox more options during the time it would take to develop Carter, plus we get to enjoy watching a winning team this year and hopefully for the next few years.

petekat
08-27-2008, 02:57 PM
The TCQ trade has to be assessed in the context of the Chris Young deal the year earlier, which resulted in the AZ OF surplus allowing us to spring TCQ. Given that Young has fallen back to earth his sophomore season and projects to be more of a Mike Cameron type, I feel a lot better about the Javy deal.


It's a fair point. We did give up a good prospect for Q. Still Carter is a minimum of 2 years away whereas Q is only 4 years older and already putting up huge numbers. Carter would have to continue to progress at a rapid pace to equal with Q has aleady done. Stil Carter has been traded for an MVP candidate and a Cy Young caliber pitcher before the age of 22, which should tell you something.

The fact of the matter is the Dback had no room for Q and wanted to get something in return. Had they known Q was going to be this good, they probabably could have gotten a ton more.

jabrch
08-27-2008, 04:40 PM
The TCQ trade has to be assessed in the context of the Chris Young deal the year earlier, which resulted in the AZ OF surplus allowing us to spring TCQ. Given that Young has fallen back to earth his sophomore season and projects to be more of a Mike Cameron type, I feel a lot better about the Javy deal.


That's an even more funny context to look at it in. For all the people who pissed and moaned about losing Chris Young, he has yet to show he can consistently hit major league pitching, with the exception of his 30-50 XBH out of his 600+PA. Meanwhile Javy continues to be very effective, TCQ is looking like an MVP candidate, and Chris Carter is looking like Chris Young without speed.

Not too shabby of moves...

seventyseven
08-27-2008, 05:06 PM
I'd be shocked if Carter doesn't become a pretty damn good MLB player, probably an all-star calibre player. With that being said, Quentin is at that level right now, so there really isn't anything to worry about.

:rolling:

Eddo144
08-27-2008, 05:17 PM
It will be a one-sided trade now and forever because the team we traded with, Arizona, won't reap the benefits if Carter does become a stud. They traded him already for Haren. Now if Haren wins 4 CY Youngs in the next 6 years, when you can consider it helping both teams. But Arizona traded TCQ and traded Chris. Lopsided.
That's demanding an awful lot of Haren. You really believe Quentin will win 4 MVPs in the next 6 years?

Sure, Carlos is the current front-runner for AL MVP, but you could make a damn good case (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/webb-or-haren/) for Haren for the NL Cy Young.

Lillian
08-27-2008, 06:28 PM
Thanks for all of the response to the thread. I really should have entitled it: "The Quentin Trade May Turn Out To Be Less Lopsided Than Most People Think". It will likely always be viewed as lopsided, but perhaps just a little less than some think, if Carter continues to progress.

jabrch
08-27-2008, 08:20 PM
Thanks for all of the response to the thread. I really should have entitled it: "The Quentin Trade May Turn Out To Be Less Lopsided Than Most People Think". It will likely always be viewed as lopsided, but perhaps just a little less than some think, if Carter continues to progress.

How exactly is it progress when he's hitting .260/.364 after hitting .291/.383 last year? Cuz he hit a few more HRs?

The Quentin trade will never be less lopsided. We got a guy who put up an MVP-like season at the major league level for a guy unable to hit decently as a 22 yo in A ball.

Carter would have to be an HOFer to make this not a lopsided deal. He'd have to be Brad Eldred good.

DSpivack
08-27-2008, 08:46 PM
How exactly is it progress when he's hitting .260/.364 after hitting .291/.383 last year? Cuz he hit a few more HRs?

The Quentin trade will never be less lopsided. We got a guy who put up an MVP-like season at the major league level for a guy unable to hit decently as a 22 yo in A ball.

Carter would have to be an HOFer to make this not a lopsided deal. He'd have to be Brad Eldred good.

From the angle of the DBacks getting Haren, I don't think they really come out as big losers.

The loser, as always, is Billy Beane.

Lillian
08-27-2008, 09:28 PM
How exactly is it progress when he's hitting .260/.364 after hitting .291/.383 last year? Cuz he hit a few more HRs?

The Quentin trade will never be less lopsided. We got a guy who put up an MVP-like season at the major league level for a guy unable to hit decently as a 22 yo in A ball.

Carter would have to be an HOFer to make this not a lopsided deal. He'd have to be Brad Eldred good.

Well, he is only 21, but apparently you feel that even at that age he should be putting up better numbers. He has drawn a lot of walks, which has given him an on base percentage 100 points over his batting average.
I thought he had a pretty good year, which except for the low batting average is almost identical to Quentin's numbers in the 'Bigs'. In that he's 4 1/2 years younger I thought his performance has been promising, but I guess your not impressed.
Only time will tell, so this is all just speculation. To reiterate, I love Carlos, and I'm thrilled we got him. I wouldn't be disappointed even if Carter also becomes a star.

TDog
08-27-2008, 10:54 PM
Thanks for all of the response to the thread. I really should have entitled it: "The Quentin Trade May Turn Out To Be Less Lopsided Than Most People Think". It will likely always be viewed as lopsided, but perhaps just a little less than some think, if Carter continues to progress.

Chances are good that Chris Carter won't see any significant playing time in the major leagues in his lifetime. He has had a lot of trouble making contact in the California League.

chaerulez
08-28-2008, 04:27 AM
I concur. I think everyone knew he had power, but he is 21 and hitting 260 in A ball? We don't need an Adam Dunn.

Um, Adam Dunn is a very good hitter. His fielding skills might be equal to that of Alfonso Soriano, but a guy who OBPs .380 while hitting 40 HRs a season is a bat you want in the lineup.

But will the trade ever be fair? Yeah it could down the line, however no way does it mean the Sox should never have done it. We got Quentin on the cheap for the next few years at least and all we had to give up was a prospect that was at least a few years away. It's a deal any GM would make. Lets put it this way, if Arizona knew what they would get out Quentin was this, they never would've needed to trade for Adam Dunn. Carter's ceiling is still just an All Star type player, only way we'll end up regretting this trade is if he becomes a HOF type player and that's really doubtful.

kraut83
08-28-2008, 07:46 AM
The loser, as always, is Billy Beane.

:fobbgod:

"Uh, Chris Carter has a higher VORP, or PECOTA or uh, something than Quentin. Yeah, that's it, better VORP."

FedEx227
08-28-2008, 08:22 AM
:fobbgod:

"Uh, Chris Carter has a higher VORP, or PECOTA or uh, something than Quentin. Yeah, that's it, better VORP."

Funny because he doesn't use VORP. VORP is mainly an exclusive tool used by BP, nothing more nothing less. Billy Beane =/= stat-obsessed. Billy Beane = value obsessed, he looks for traits players have that most of the league undervalues, for a time it was OBP and OPS, then he went with failed first rounders, now it appears he's just going for a glut of prospects. But good try anyway.

Craig Grebeck
08-28-2008, 08:23 AM
From the angle of the DBacks getting Haren, I don't think they really come out as big losers.

The loser, as always, is Billy Beane.
I don't agree. When you look at the quality of players AZ gave up, in particular Chris Carter, Aaron Cunningham, and Brett Anderson, it's not very lopsided at all. Cunningham has been amazing this year and Anderson has established himself as one of the best pitching prospects in the game.

I'd say the loss of Carter has been soothed by Brandon Allen -- who is left handed and mashed 27 HR between A and AA.

CashMan
08-28-2008, 08:31 AM
Um, Adam Dunn is a very good hitter. His fielding skills might be equal to that of Alfonso Soriano, but a guy who OBPs .380 while hitting 40 HRs a season is a bat you want in the lineup.



I don't think you got what I was saying. We don't need a guy who can hit .230 and hit 40hrs. Plus, do you really like his 200k seasons?

munchman33
08-28-2008, 08:34 AM
Well, he is only 21, but apparently you feel that even at that age he should be putting up better numbers. He has drawn a lot of walks, which has given him an on base percentage 100 points over his batting average.
I thought he had a pretty good year, which except for the low batting average is almost identical to Quentin's numbers in the 'Bigs'. In that he's 4 1/2 years younger I thought his performance has been promising, but I guess your not impressed.
Only time will tell, so this is all just speculation. To reiterate, I love Carlos, and I'm thrilled we got him. I wouldn't be disappointed even if Carter also becomes a star.

Carter seems to be projecting to Adam Dunn. Which is great for him. But everyone on the planet would rather have Carlos Quentin, who projects to no one. Because he's THE Carlos Quentin. The one, the only, the original.

munchman33
08-28-2008, 08:35 AM
:fobbgod:

"Uh, Chris Carter has a higher VORP, or PECOTA or uh, something than Quentin. Yeah, that's it, better VORP."

Carlos has one of the best VORP's in baseball.

doublem23
08-28-2008, 08:42 AM
Funny because he doesn't use VORP. VORP is mainly an exclusive tool used by BP, nothing more nothing less. Billy Beane =/= stat-obsessed. Billy Beane = value obsessed, he looks for traits players have that most of the league undervalues, for a time it was OBP and OPS, then he went with failed first rounders, now it appears he's just going for a glut of prospects. But good try anyway.

The fact that anyone still defends this guy boggles my mind. :scratch:

NLaloosh
08-28-2008, 08:56 AM
If by "fair" you mean a completely lopsided steal of a deal, then I agree with you.

ChiSoxFan7
08-28-2008, 09:06 AM
This deal was one of those that seems very even at the begining then comes out the other way once the games start...


What if Carlos blew out his shoulder his first game in Spring Training and was out for the year? We all would have said worst trade ever, especially with the sucess of the young carter.


But now with TCQ's sick stats, it's obvious that we won in this trade.

Lillian
08-28-2008, 09:14 AM
As per usual, there have been some pretty extreme takes on this topic.
Some of you have said that Carter will likely never see playing time in the Big Leagues, while others think that he projects to an Adam Dunn type player, and even an All Star.
The whole point of my original post was that perhaps the trade will ultimately not be viewed quite as one sided as it is now.
It just seems to me that it is hard to totally rule out the guy's prospects.
He is only 21, and he is leading his League in Slugging Percentage, Homers, and RBI's.
The trade will most likely always be viewed as a great deal for the Sox, but if Carter becomes Adam Dunn, or an All Star, would it still be considered completely lopsided?
I never suggested that we should not all be thrilled with the trade, or that
we may even come to regret it, but only that maybe it won't turn out to be so completely lopsided.
It seems foolish to completely write off a guys chances when he is only 21, and performing at a high level, albeit in A Ball.
Meantime, TCQ is 26 today. Happy Birthday, Carlos.

kittle42
08-28-2008, 09:15 AM
As per usual, there have been some pretty extreme takes on this topic.
Some of you have said that Carter will likely never see playing time in the Big Leagues, while others think that he projects to an Adam Dunn type player, and even an All Star.
The whole point of my original post was that perhaps the trade will ultimately not be viewed quite as one sided as it is now.
It just seems to me that it is hard to totally rule out the guy's prospects.
He is only 21, and he is leading his League in Slugging Percentage, Homers, and RBI's.
The trade will most likely always be viewed as a great deal for the Sox, but if Carter becomes Adam Dunn, or an All Star, would it still be considered completely lopsided?
I never suggested that we should not all be thrilled with the trade, or that
we may even come to regret it, but only that maybe it won't turn out to be so completely lopsided.
It seems foolish to completely write off a guys chances when he is only 21, and performing at a high level, albeit in A Ball.
Meantime, TCQ is 26 today. Happy Birthday, Carlos.

This can be said of almost any trade when it is made and involves prospects. What's the point of debating it?

Lillian
08-28-2008, 09:20 AM
This can be said of almost any trade when it is made and involves prospects. What's the point of debating it?

Not if one of the prospects shines and the other one fizzles, which is not the case here.

doublem23
08-28-2008, 09:27 AM
As per usual, there have been some pretty extreme takes on this topic.
Some of you have said that Carter will likely never see playing time in the Big Leagues, while others think that he projects to an Adam Dunn type player, and even an All Star.
The whole point of my original post was that perhaps the trade will ultimately not be viewed quite as one sided as it is now.
It just seems to me that it is hard to totally rule out the guy's prospects.
He is only 21, and he is leading his League in Slugging Percentage, Homers, and RBI's.
The trade will most likely always be viewed as a great deal for the Sox, but if Carter becomes Adam Dunn, or an All Star, would it still be considered completely lopsided?
I never suggested that we should not all be thrilled with the trade, or that
we may even come to regret it, but only that maybe it won't turn out to be so completely lopsided.
It seems foolish to completely write off a guys chances when he is only 21, and performing at a high level, albeit in A Ball.
Meantime, TCQ is 26 today. Happy Birthday, Carlos.

All of these questions have already been answered, repeatedly, in this thread.

To summarize (again): It doesn't really matter what Carter does in his career or not, the trade will always be a lopsided win for the White Sox. Projecting A-ball hitters (especially those with suspicious all power or nothing stats like Carter) as future MLB regulars, let alone stars, is nearly impossible and very risky. The Sox turned him into an immediate MVP-type player. That is an excellent trade from our standpoint.

How many more times must we go over this?

kittle42
08-28-2008, 09:28 AM
Not if one of the prospects shines and the other one fizzles, which is not the case here.

Carter is an A ball and his stats, as discussed, are not out of this world. There is plenty of time for him to fizzle. This discussion is thus pretty premature.

I also agree with doublem's response above.

jabrch
08-28-2008, 09:48 AM
Some of you have said that Carter will likely never see playing time in the Big Leagues, while others think that he projects to an Adam Dunn type player, and even an All Star.

That's completely irrelevant in evaluating the fairness of this trade.

The whole point of my original post was that perhaps the trade will ultimately not be viewed quite as one sided as it is now.

It will always be lopsided - regardless of what Carter becomes. We got a guy ready to deliver high end productivity for a guy not able to do so in Single A at age 22. That's lopsided - and I can't see any reasonable arguement to the contrary.

It just seems to me that it is hard to totally rule out the guy's prospects.

Nobody did. But that doesn't mean the deal isn't totally lopsided.

He is only 21, and he is leading his League in Slugging Percentage, Homers, and RBI's.

And he is not hitting at a clip in Single A that projects positively going forward.

The trade will most likely always be viewed as a great deal for the Sox, but if Carter becomes Adam Dunn, or an All Star, would it still be considered completely lopsided?

Yes - because we got a guy who WAS an all star for a guy who had a chance to become one.

It seems foolish to completely write off a guys chances when he is only 21,

Nobody is

and performing at a high level, albeit in A Ball.

.262 = High Level? My gosh...He's not even performing at a Brad Eldred level.

jabrch
08-28-2008, 09:50 AM
Well, he is only 21, but apparently you feel that even at that age he should be putting up better numbers.

I don't feel he should be puitting up better numbers - because I don't think he's a great hitter. YOU seem to think he's going to be a great hitter, thus I assume .260 is not an acceptable average?

kevingrt
08-28-2008, 10:01 AM
Carter is an A ball and his stats, as discussed, are not out of this world. There is plenty of time for him to fizzle. This discussion is thus pretty premature.

I also agree with doublem's response above.

You are exactly right. This is so premature. Right now we stole TCQ. Obviously Carter my turn into something good. But that won't be for 3-4 years. So, there is no question this is a huge lopsided trade.

jabrch
08-28-2008, 10:10 AM
Lillian - send me an EFT to my bank (Chase) for 65 million dollars. I will give you a lottery ticket. It's not a lopsided deal because the lottery ticket could be worth the same as the cash. Heck - it could be worth more. Oh - and the lottery ticket will be for the lottery in 2010. That's not lopsided - right?

champagne030
08-28-2008, 10:18 AM
Lillian - send me an EFT to my bank (Chase) for 65 million dollars. I will give you a lottery ticket. It's not a lopsided deal because the lottery ticket could be worth the same as the cash. Heck - it could be worth more. Oh - and the lottery ticket will be for the lottery in 2010. That's not lopsided - right?

Horrible analogy. TCQ was a lottery ticket this past January. The White Sox thought so much of him this past March they were going to start Jerry ****ing Owens over him.

The value of TCQ when we traded for him and what he's worth now is so far different it's ridiculous.

Eddo144
08-28-2008, 10:33 AM
I don't think you got what I was saying. We don't need a guy who can hit .230 and hit 40hrs. Plus, do you really like his 200k seasons?
Dunn may be hitting only .238, but his OBP is .387. Only nine players in the NL (and 18 in all of baseball) have been less likely to make an out that Dunn when they step up to the plate. Who cares how he makes his outs when he's making so few of them?

FedEx227
08-28-2008, 11:05 AM
The fact that anyone still defends this guy boggles my mind. :scratch:

The fact that people still needless bash him without basis of how he actually does his job is mind boggling.

kevingrt
08-28-2008, 11:08 AM
Horrible analogy. TCQ was a lottery ticket this past January. The White Sox thought so much of him this past March they were going to start Jerry ****ing Owens over him.

The value of TCQ when we traded for him and what he's worth now is so far different it's ridiculous.

True. But we are talking about now. We know it is a lopsided trade now. The discussion that was brought up by this post was trying to argue that this may not be as lopsided of a trade as everyone thinks.

munchman33
08-28-2008, 11:10 AM
.262 = High Level? My gosh...He's not even performing at a Brad Eldred level.

Be careful. The Nick Swisher fanboys will tell you that twenty points lower is still superstar caliber.

doublem23
08-28-2008, 11:11 AM
The fact that people still needless bash him without basis of how he actually does his job is mind boggling.

You're telling me you'd be happy if you were an A's fan?

Lillian
08-28-2008, 11:13 AM
All of these questions have already been answered, repeatedly, in this thread.

To summarize (again): It doesn't really matter what Carter does in his career or not, the trade will always be a lopsided win for the White Sox. Projecting A-ball hitters (especially those with suspicious all power or nothing stats like Carter) as future MLB regulars, let alone stars, is nearly impossible and very risky. The Sox turned him into an immediate MVP-type player. That is an excellent trade from our standpoint.

How many more times must we go over this?

Well, I guess you could go over it ad nauseum, and it still wouldn't make it correct. A statement like; "It doesn't really matter what Carter does in his career or not, the trade will always be a lopsided win for the White Sox." leaves me dumbfounded. Of course it matters what Carter does in his career. It's one thing to say you don't think he'll ever be good, and yet quite another to say that it doesn't matter how good he becomes, when you are assessing the trade.

jabrch
08-28-2008, 11:17 AM
But we are talking about now. We know it is a lopsided trade now. The discussion that was brought up by this post was trying to argue that this may not be as lopsided of a trade as everyone thinks.

Exactly...Present value of TCQ vs Present Value of CC. How the hell can you consider this even close. The discount rate of a prospect with CC's profile is so large. The deal was lopsided when made. It is lopsided today. And it will be lopsided tomorrow unless Chris Carter exceeds TCQs performance by a VERY large margin.

jabrch
08-28-2008, 11:19 AM
Well, I guess you could go over it ad nauseum, and it still wouldn't make it correct. A statement like; "It doesn't really matter what Carter does in his career or not, the trade will always be a lopsided win for the White Sox." leaves me dumbfounded. Of course it matters what Carter does in his career. It's one thing to say you don't think he'll ever be good, and yet quite another to say that it doesn't matter how good he becomes, when you are assessing the trade.

If you don't understand present value of an asset and the discounting based on probability of a positive outcome happening with the risk associated to it, then there's not much that can be done to explain it.

FedEx227
08-28-2008, 12:05 PM
You're telling me you'd be happy if you were an A's fan?

Lol... when did I say that?! The original poster made light of Billy Beane's statistical analysis, I said "He doesn't use VORP". The end. That was it. No I wouldn't be happy if I were an A's fan because of the way they sometimes needlessly trade their players, especially this year when both Harden and Haren were NOT deals that needed to be done. I'd be very upset as a fan base. Add in our playoff troubles and of course not.

But where in the course of my defending the practices Billy Beane uses and letting the original poster know that despite his best efforts of calling him a stat-nerd Beane doesn't use either of the stats mentioned become "I WISH I WERE AN A'S FAN!"

voodoochile
08-28-2008, 12:10 PM
Lol... when did I say that?! The original poster made light of Billy Beane's statistical analysis, I said "He doesn't use VORP". The end. That was it. No I wouldn't be happy if I were an A's fan because of the way they sometimes needlessly trade their players, especially this year when both Harden and Haren were NOT deals that needed to be done. I'd be very upset as a fan base. Add in our playoff troubles and of course not.

But where in the course of my defending the practices Billy Beane uses and letting the original poster know that despite his best efforts of calling him a stat-nerd Beane doesn't use either of the stats mentioned become "I WISH I WERE AN A'S FAN!"

Didn't Beane make some quote when he traded Swish to Kenny about the prospects in the minors needing replenishing? He certainly restocked this year that's for sure and actually if he'd managed to get TCQ instead of CC that trade would have been huge in his favor with two starting pitchers in their first season having ERA's in the low 4's or high 3's and TCQ, but he got CC instead so the minors are well stocked at least for the present and BB is a happy camper.

Now here in Chicago, we got no minor league system to speak of but are in our third pennant chase in 4 years and have a WS title to boot. Oh and we got TCQ...:D:

Do Oakland minor league teams regularly win championships? Just curious...

FedEx227
08-28-2008, 12:16 PM
Didn't Beane make some quote when he traded Swish to Kenny about the prospects in the minors needing replenishing? He certainly restocked this year that's for sure and actually if he'd managed to get TCQ instead of CC that trade would have been huge in his favor with two starting pitchers in their first season having ERA's in the low 4's or high 3's and TCQ, but he got CC instead so the minors are well stocked at least for the present and BB is a happy camper.

Now here in Chicago, we got no minor league system to speak of but are in our third pennant chase in 4 years and have a WS title to boot. Oh and we got TCQ...:D:

Do Oakland minor league teams regularly win championships? Just curious...

They have a pretty decent amount of success.

The Sacramento RiverCats (AAA) won the league title in 07 as well as 04, and have won division titles in 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007

also the The Midland Rockhounds (AA) won a league title in 2005.

Eddo144
08-28-2008, 12:20 PM
You're telling me you'd be happy if you were an A's fan?
No, but I would be more upset with the owners that refuse to spend money to retain players.

Face it, that's why Beane trades quality pitchers like Harden and Haren. Now, is Beane the best GM? No. He tends to treat the game too much like a market, where he sells high (Harden) when he can. However, baseball isn't like a market, in that it's not continuous; there are discrete seasons in baseball, each one with a rather specific goal (to win a World Series/pennant/division title).

Beane's done an excellent job as a GM at coming out ahead in the long run; most of his trades have a net positive result for the club. However, because the ownership won't spend money to get better players (which is not Beane's fault), they can never stock up for a true World Series run.

Beane's a very good talent/ability evaluator (whether by recognizing a player's physical tools or analyzing his previous production), but is held back by a situation where he can't necessarily get the players he wants for financial reasons.

I'd really like to see what kind of team he would put together for an organization that spends freely (like the Yankees, Red Sox, or Dodgers) or even for an organization that is middle-of-the-pack (like the White Sox, Cardinals, or Astros).

FedEx227
08-28-2008, 12:25 PM
I'd really like to see what kind of team he would put together for an organization that spends freely (like the Yankees, Red Sox, or Dodgers) or even for an organization that is middle-of-the-pack (like the White Sox, Cardinals, or Astros).

Beane doesn't want that pressure. He was given the Red Sox GM job and turned it down, they turned to Epstein and won the World Series.

jabrch
08-28-2008, 12:57 PM
he sells high (Harden) when he can.

Do you believe he sold high with Harden? I don't get that feeling.

Lillian
08-28-2008, 01:24 PM
If you don't understand present value of an asset and the discounting based on probability of a positive outcome happening with the risk associated to it, then there's not much that can be done to explain it.

Let me try to understand what you're saying. Do you mean that if player A is performing at the Major League level, it really doesn't matter how well prospect B, for whom he was traded, is performing, or how highly regarded are his future prospects? The fact that prospect B is presently not making a contribution for the Major League team automatically means that he has virtually no value, compared to player A.
Is that a fair paraphrasing of your point?

Eddo144
08-28-2008, 01:29 PM
Do you believe he sold high with Harden? I don't get that feeling.
Yes, I believe he did. Harden is a huge injury risk, and therefore didn't have a lot of suitors. He also had been healthy all this year and pitching very well. His value was higher this year than next because next year is his last year under contract.

I get the feeling there were just not many suitors for Harden as well, and Beane figured that he might as well trade him now to get a young pitcher with a lot of promise than wait a year and risk Harden being hurt again and worthless on the trade market.

Would I have traded Harden? No. The A's were in second place and having a very good year. Their run differential at the time indicated they were likely to win more games going forward than the Angels, so making up the ground would have been conceivable.

Eddo144
08-28-2008, 01:33 PM
If you don't understand present value of an asset and the discounting based on probability of a positive outcome happening with the risk associated to it, then there's not much that can be done to explain it.
jabrch, the 2004 Devil Rays have an interesting offer for you. Apparently they're willing to give you the contributing-on-a-major-league-level Victor Zambrano and will take that minor-leaguer-with-discounted-value Scott Kazmir off your hands.

TDog
08-28-2008, 01:40 PM
...
Do Oakland minor league teams regularly win championships? Just curious...

Minor league championships don't mean as much as you might think. I'm sure they mean something to the local fans and the players that win them, but they seem arbitrary. The Stockton Ports are not a contending team at the moment, but they have clinched a spot in the California League playoffs. They are 10 games out as the second half of the season winds down and five games below .500. They finished a game behind the San Jose Giants in the first half, and anyone who thinks the second-place Modesto Nuts are going to catch the Giants for the second-half title is crazy. The Giants have a 6.5 game lead with five games remaining. San Francisco's farm system is supposed to be emptier than the the White Sox' system, but they seem to be the team to beat, at least in the North. It looks like Lancaster will win both halves of the South Division season. I don't know who else will make the playoffs from the South.

The problem is that many of the the players playing in the playoffs, will not be the players that had much to do with their teams winning the first half. Stockton has promoted a lot of guys.

It is curious that Stockton hasn't promoted Carter ("didn't" -- the minor league season is nearly over). He was named Rookie of the Year (http://www.stocktonports.com/news/news/index.html?article_id=664) for the California League, in just his second season in Class A ball. He hit his 38th home run this week against Lancaster and is tied for second in minor league baseball. He long ago set the single-season record for the Ports, who have been around a long time, long enough that they gave away statues of former Port pitching star Ernie Broglio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernie_Broglio) in April. (Had I gone to the game, I would have been looking to trade it for a Lou Brock bobblehead). The fact that Carter strikes out so much -- 150 times in 132 games -- seems to be a concern. I also is curious that he is the team's DH. Players being groomed for the major leagues usually don't spend the entire season setting records as designated hitters in the California League. If they are setting records, they generally are learning a position.

A lot of California League players do go on to make the major leagues. That is, a lot of major leaguers once played in the California League. Walt "No-Neck" Williams began his professional career in Modesto. Ports radio commercials about seeing future stars talk about the major leaguers that played for them. But most Calfirnia Leaguers don't get to the majors and some of the fan favorites who put up great numbers never get past AAA ball.

If you had seen Mike Yastrzemski (Carl Michael Yastrzemski Jr.) hit for the Birmingham Barons in 1986 (before he was promoted), you would have thought he was destined to play for the White Sox. He never got higher than Vancouver. (Sadly, he is now dead, and the end of his life wasn't pretty, although his son is playing well enough in high school to lead some to believe he could play in the majors someday. At least a college scholarship may be in his future.)

Hitting home runs in the California League and hitting line drives all over the Southern League does not guarantee a player a major league career.

We can talk about Chris Carter if he makes it to the majors. There is even a chance he will be a free agent before that happens.

Eddo144
08-28-2008, 01:47 PM
It is curious that Stockton hasn't promoted Carter ("didn't" -- the minor league season is nearly over). He was named Rookie of the Year (http://www.stocktonports.com/news/news/index.html?article_id=664) for the California League, in just his second season in Class A ball. He hit his 38th home run this week against Lancaster and is tied for second in minor league baseball. He long ago set the single-season record for the Ports, who have been around a long time, long enough that they gave away statues of former Port pitching star Ernie Broglio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernie_Broglio) in April. (Had I gone to the game, I would have been looking to trade it for a Lou Brock bobblehead). The fact that Carter strikes out so much -- 150 times in 132 games -- seems to be a concern. I also is curious that he is the team's DH. Players being groomed for the major leagues usually don't spend the entire season setting records as designated hitters in the California League. If they are setting records, they generally are learning a position.
It is interesting, though I imagine those in charge feel there's not much advantage to pushing him up to double- or triple-A this season, so they might as well let him win awards and possibly challenge California league HR records.

If the strikeouts are a huge concern, they shouldn't be. Some of the best major league hitters strike out a ton - Thome, Howard, Dunn, Granderson, Reggie Jackson, to name a few. As long as he's still getting on base at a good clip, a high strikeout total just means less groundouts and flyouts, nothing more.

Also, I loved the Lou Brock bobblehead line. Classic. :smile:

jabrch
08-28-2008, 02:01 PM
Let me try to understand what you're saying. Do you mean that if player A is performing at the Major League level, it really doesn't matter how well prospect B, for whom he was traded, is performing, or how highly regarded are his future prospects? The fact that prospect B is presently not making a contribution for the Major League team automatically means that he has virtually no value, compared to player A.
Is that a fair paraphrasing of your point?

No...that's not accurate.

I am saying that if a player is performing at X level in A ball, and you can get a player performing at 10X level in MLB, that this is a simple call to make on the value of the trade.

Something about the bird, the hand and the bush...

jabrch
08-28-2008, 02:12 PM
jabrch, the 2004 Devil Rays have an interesting offer for you. Apparently they're willing to give you the contributing-on-a-major-league-level Victor Zambrano and will take that minor-leaguer-with-discounted-value Scott Kazmir off your hands.

First off, Victor Zambrano is not equal to Carlos - but I get your illustration.

I'll call your interesting example, and raise you 100 examples of guys traded for prospects that didn't work out. For every Zambrano for Kazmir, there are 100+ cases where a veteran performing at a level above average (not even talking about stars) is traded for Single A prospects who never pan out.

Let's do this jeopardy style...
A: Max Ramirez, Bobby Hill, Matt Brubeck, Felix Diaz, Ryan Meaux, Eddie Taubensee and Willie Blair

Q: Who are prospects traded for Kenny Lofton that didn't work out. The Lofton deals were lopsided, from day 1 and it never changed.

TDog
08-28-2008, 02:28 PM
...
If the strikeouts are a huge concern, they shouldn't be. Some of the best major league hitters strike out a ton - Thome, Howard, Dunn, Granderson, Reggie Jackson, to name a few. As long as he's still getting on base at a good clip, a high strikeout total just means less groundouts and flyouts, nothing more. ...

Of the players you named, only Reggie Jackson came up as a five-tool player. Strikeouts weren't a huge concern with Mickey Mantle, either, becaue he was a five tool player. For many players coming up through the minors, high strikeouts serve as a red flag. Some of the players with high minor-league strikeout totals do make it to the majors, though. But if all you seem to do in the minors is hit home runs and strike out (striking out fiour times for every home run), you aren't on the fast track to most major league teams.

jabrch
08-28-2008, 02:32 PM
Of the players you named, only Reggie Jackson came up as a five-tool player.

And Reggie was a .262/.356/.490 hitter on his career. If he didn't have 500 HRs and play in NY, his numbers are much less impressive.

So if Chris Carter becomes Reggie Jackson, someday, then you can look back on the deal differently. But that doesn't change how fair the deal is today.

jabrch
08-28-2008, 02:39 PM
But if all you seem to do in the minors is hit home runs and strike out (striking out fiour times for every home run), you aren't on the fast track to most major league teams.

Bernardo Brito, Ernie Young, Rick Lanceloitti, Dick Stuart, Buzz Arlett, Steve Balboni, Jared Goedert all say hello.

EndemicSox
08-28-2008, 02:46 PM
Be careful. The Nick Swisher fanboys will tell you that twenty points lower is still superstar caliber.

Haven't we learned by now that BA is pretty much scoffed at by most of the stat junkies that work for MLB squads? .OBP is everything, and both Quentin/Swisher(and Carter), project to be excellent assets in this department.

TDog
08-28-2008, 02:52 PM
And Reggie was a .262/.356/.490 hitter on his career. If he didn't have 500 HRs and play in NY, his numbers are much less impressive.

So if Chris Carter becomes Reggie Jackson, someday, then you can look back on the deal differently. But that doesn't change how fair the deal is today.

Reggie Jackson got votes for MVP in his first full season in the majors, playing for a sixth-place team.. People look at his stats and forget what he meant to the baseball teams he played on. Had he played out his career in Oakland, he probably still would have hit 500 home runs (and passed Mantle in strikeouts). Before he went to the Yankees (via Baltimore), he had already played on three World Series championship teams.

If Chris Carter learns to steal bases, develops a canon of an arm to throw out baserunners from right field (Jackson did that more than 100 times in his career(, and can hit better in the majors than he has in the California League, and consistently for many years, he too has a shot at the Hall of Fame.

Carter doesn't seem to be learning any position.

I'm not a big Reggie Jackson fan, but his batting average doesn't tell you how good a baseball player he was.

kittle42
08-28-2008, 02:55 PM
I'm not a big Reggie Jackson fan, but his batting average doesn't tell you how good a baseball player he was.

Batting avewrage only tells you a very partial story unless a guy is hitting under, say, .210 or over .330 or so.

jabrch
08-28-2008, 02:56 PM
Reggie Jackson got votes for MVP in his first full season in the majors, playing for a sixth-place team.. People look at his stats and forget what he meant to the baseball teams he played on. Had he played out his career in Oakland, he probably still would have hit 500 home runs (and passed Mantle in strikeouts). Before he went to the Yankees (via Baltimore), he had already played on three World Series championship teams.

If Chris Carter learns to steal bases, develops a canon of an arm to throw out baserunners from right field (Jackson did that more than 100 times in his career(, and can hit better in the majors than he has in the California League, and consistently for many years, he too has a shot at the Hall of Fame.

Carter doesn't seem to be learning any position.

I'm not a big Reggie Jackson fan, but his batting average doesn't tell you how good a baseball player he was.

I agree that he was a very good overall player. I personally don't think he was significantly better than guys like Evans and Lynn - neither of whom will make it to the HOF. I don't think he's much better than Dawson or Raines either. He's got a lot of Fred McGriff in him.

If CC ever becomes any of those players (incluiding Reggie), he'd be doing himself a wonderful service. That being said, he's a long way off from being close. Without looking, I'd guess those guys had MUCH better performance at Single A, back in the day when talent wasn't so watered down in the minors. Rightn now, you are correct - CC is a one dimensional player. Thus- the deal was lopsided today, and will always be lopsided no matter what. You should be able to acquire a 1 dimensional Single A slugger for much less than a player who has MVP type numbers in the majors that same season.

TDog
08-28-2008, 02:57 PM
Bernardo Brito, Ernie Young, Rick Lanceloitti, Dick Stuart, Buzz Arlett, Steve Balboni, Jared Goedert all say hello.

In fact, I was going to shout out a big hello to Bye-Bye Balboni in my post.

voodoochile
08-28-2008, 04:53 PM
Reggie Jackson also gets bonus points for the whole Mr. October thing. In 78-79 playoffs he clubbed 9 HR, 23 RBI, .361/.445/.778/1.223. He had some other good playoffs too, but those two years pretty much cemented his place in the HOF.

Also, we forget how hard it was to hit 500 HR back then because we've been jaded. When Jackson retired he was 6th on the all time HR list and 4 of the guys who have passed him since then are known steroid abusers Bonds, Palmeiro (by 6), Sosa (by 43) and McGwire (by 20). Even if you accept that Bonds would have passed him anyway, there is a strong case to be made that the other 3 would not have without their chemicals. That means that without steroids, Jackson would probably be no worse than 8th on the all time HR list. That has to be HOF worthy...

ron_j_galt
08-28-2008, 05:08 PM
I don't understand the controversies here. Have the Sox won this trade to this point? Absolutely. Would any MLB team now jump at the chance to trade Chris Carter for Carlos Quentin? Yes. Is Carter having a good season? Yes; despite his strikeouts (which certainly can pose a challenge going forward), he's been one of the best hitters in his league. It's total nonsense to say he'll never amount to anything and that he isn't a very valuable commodity right now; let's see how he handles AA first. The strikeouts are definitely a problem, but I doubt the A's are unhappy with Carter's season. The important thing is that the White Sox got a solid player for a 15th round pick. They bought low on a player coming off a terrible season and an offseason surgery and it worked. It is now hard to imagine Carter having a better peak than Quentin, which was not the case at the time of the trade. This trade is more lopsided than people think simply because no one really cares what Carter is doing right now. If anyone is unhappy about anything, it's the D-Backs for giving Eric Byrnes the ridiculous contract that forced their hand on Quentin in the first place.

doublem23
08-28-2008, 05:16 PM
I don't understand the controversies here. Have the Sox won this trade to this point? Absolutely.

It is ridiculous that this thread has gotten into Tomato Award territory, when it could/should have been resolved in under 5 posts.

kittle42
08-28-2008, 05:26 PM
It is ridiculous that this thread has gotten into Tomato Award territory, when it could/should have been resolved in under 5 posts.

Well, it was a successful attempt at creating conversation for conversation's sake, I suppose.

JimmyJoe
08-28-2008, 06:07 PM
Apparently Tracy Ringolsby from Fox Sports thinks this has worked out for the Sox. He must be monitoring WSI and did some research today.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8495976/White-Sox-struck-gold-with-Quentin

rdivaldi
08-29-2008, 01:40 AM
Chris Carter's is a big guy with a long and loopy swing. Unless he's going to magically turn into Frank Thomas I can't believe that this thread was even started. He'll be lucky to sniff the majors in 2 years.

I agree that this thread needs to be put out to pasture, it's ridiculous at best.

kittle42
08-29-2008, 11:14 AM
Chris Carter's is a big guy with a long and loopy swing. Unless he's going to magically turn into Frank Thomas I can't believe that this thread was even started. He'll be lucky to sniff the majors in 2 years.

I agree that this thread needs to be put out to pasture, it's ridiculous at best.

It has now been made even more ridiculous! :tongue:

EndemicSox
08-29-2008, 03:44 PM
Chris Carter's is a big guy with a long and loopy swing. Unless he's going to magically turn into Frank Thomas I can't believe that this thread was even started. He'll be lucky to sniff the majors in 2 years.

I agree that this thread needs to be put out to pasture, it's ridiculous at best.

You're probably right, the odds are stacked against him doing anything in the pros. But I think his swing is similar to Ryan Howard's, and like Howard, I think his average will be tolerated if he can get on base at a decent rate. No point in talking about him anymore, time will tell what kind of player he becomes.

jabrch
08-29-2008, 04:29 PM
You're probably right, the odds are stacked against him doing anything in the pros. But I think his swing is similar to Ryan Howard's, and like Howard, I think his average will be tolerated if he can get on base at a decent rate. No point in talking about him anymore, time will tell what kind of player he becomes.

Except Ryan hit .313 his rookie year and .268 his second year. His slide into .228, will descrease his value greatly. Here's the kicker...

Ryan Howard in AAA Scranton for 200+ ABs before being called up hit .371/.467/.690. His career minor league line was .299/.387/.550.

Mr. Carter looks very little like Mr. Howard did when in the minors. Carter has nearly 1400 ABs in Rookie and A ball. He turns 22 this winter. Howard's season turning 22 was his first full season in the minors and he hit .280/.367/.468 - without the benefit of having 1400 ABs under his belt. (good for him - with that frame - he doesn't see much under his belt)

The odds of Carter being Howard are VERY VERY VERY low. And I'm not talking about the Howard that hit .313/.425/.659 in his first full season, I am talking about the guy hitting .237/.324/.504 today. Carter barely can do that against Single A pitchers....

BadBobbyJenks
08-29-2008, 04:32 PM
It has now been made even more ridiculous! :tongue:

Chris Carter owns the word is, what is so hard to understand?:tongue: