Should the Sox trade Sale?

[cards press box]

No.

[Chez]

Hypothetically, yes, I don't think you would ever get fair value for Sale. I would keep him.

[TheVulture]

Originally Posted by FielderJones

Yeah. For Mike Trout.

Only if they throw in Conger.

[TheVulture]

Originally Posted by russ99

I wouldn't move Sale unless at least one MLB-experienced quality young player were coming back to us.

I'd trade Sale for Harper or Trout, straight up.

What's with the teal? You actually wouldn't trade for Trout?

[DSpivack]

Originally Posted by TheVulture

What's with the teal? You actually wouldn't trade for Trout?

The teal is that neither team would think about doing that.

[Huisj]

Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo

I was looking at this from the club perspective, not the player perspective. I think the 2013 Sox are about where the 88 Sox were. The pieces are different, and at different stages of development, but overall the picture is similar.

It will take two years to overhaul the starting lineup. If we focus on defense and fundamentals, we can be competitive again in 2015, similar to the 1990 Sox.

Given that we can overhaul the starting lineup in two years, it makes perfect sense to keep Sale, just like it made perfect sense to Larry Himes to keep Jack McDowell in 88.

Now we just need to hit home runs on our high draft picks in 2014 and 2015.

I guess I get what you're saying. I just think it's a bit of a strange comparison since the Sox stunk when McDowell first came up as a very young pitcher, and by the time he established himself, they were getting good. The Sox were (relatively) good when Sale came up, and now with him firmly established, they are a significant rebuilding away from being good again.

McDowell came up with a lousy team and got better as the team was rebuilt around him. Sale came up with a good team and got better as the team crumbled.

Maybe a more closely matched theoretical situation to ponder is this: Would the Sox have considered trading McDowell in 1991 or '92 if they had been 15 games below .500 in July and had a team made up of mostly crappy veterans who were worth nothing?

[soxfanreggie]

There has never been a player who is untradable, the offers just aren't good enough to get it done. If you think we would turn down a deal like Harper and Strasburg for Sale, you would be kidding yourself. That ring said, I have a better chance of flying to the moon than that.

I don't feel we would get enough in return to make it worth it right now.

[Frater Perdurabo]

Originally Posted by Huisj

I guess I get what you're saying. I just think it's a bit of a strange comparison since the Sox stunk when McDowell first came up as a very young pitcher, and by the time he established himself, they were getting good. The Sox were (relatively) good when Sale came up, and now with him firmly established, they are a significant rebuilding away from being good again.

McDowell came up with a lousy team and got better as the team was rebuilt around him. Sale came up with a good team and got better as the team crumbled.

Maybe a more closely matched theoretical situation to ponder is this: Would the Sox have considered trading McDowell in 1991 or '92 if they had been 15 games below .500 in July and had a team made up of mostly crappy veterans who were worth nothing?

We can compete in 2015 if we keep Sale.

If we trade Sale, we probably won't compete until 2016-2017 or later, and the odds are longer, because ace pitchers are hard to find.

[Domeshot17]

We trade Sale in the right deal, of course.

I said this a while back, but lets say the Rangers just got desperate, and said Chris Sale is the difference between a title and not.

Then they come and offer Profar, Mike Olt, and some combo like Martin Perez, Justin Grimm and Joey Gallo....

Yah, I would drive Sale to the airport and pack for him.

Now if the Rangers called and offered Perez Grimm and Gallo, no thank you.

But if someone is willing to offer you a package of 2 guys with all star potential and 2 more projected mlb starters, you have to take that.

[StillMissOzzie]

Yes! Trade Chris Sale NOW! Inverted W! Inevitable injury risk!

Sorry, I just couldn't resist after reading another thread. While I don't think that anyone is untradable, Sale is the kind of player you build around, not build with by unloading. It would have to be an overwhelming offer.

SMO

[RCWHITESOX]

Originally Posted by FielderJones

Yeah. For Mike Trout.

I for one hope they don't trade Sale or Peavy; but Fielder Jones offer I would take; but since it won't happen keep Sale.

[FielderJones]

Originally Posted by RCWHITESOX

I for one hope they don't trade Sale or Peavy; but Fielder Jones offer I would take; but since it won't happen keep Sale.

Yeah, that's the point. The only way I would let go of Sale is for a current MLB all star. No one's going to offer that.

[voodoochile]

Has to be a heck of a deal and only because I don't think the Sox are close to competing for a while. However maybe with Sale Santiago, Quintana and Danks they aren't as far away as I currently think and my emotions about how badly this season is going are overruling my ability to think rationally. The one bright spot on this team is the pitching staff going forward. There is enough solid young pitching talent to build around. However the position players are either woefully inept or getting old fast. I can't think of anyone save maybe Beckham I view as a surefire keeper at this point in time.

So I guess if the right offer came along I'd have to think about it, but it depends on how well they can fill the glaring holes they have with their fat stack of cash.

[TomBradley72]

Originally Posted by RCWHITESOX

I for one hope they don't trade Sale or Peavy; but Fielder Jones offer I would take; but since it won't happen keep Sale.

I have no issue with trading Peavy(assuming we get some value), 34-29, 4.00 ERA- with the Sox, aging, injury prone, it's been 6 years since he won > 12 games in a season- by the time we're good again- I don't seem him as a big piece of the puzzle-

[TheVulture]

Originally Posted by TomBradley72

I have no issue with trading Peavy(assuming we get some value), 34-29, 4.00 ERA- with the Sox, aging, injury prone, it's been 6 years since he won > 12 games in a season- by the time we're good again- I don't seem him as a big piece of the puzzle-

Overall I agree, but it's not Peavy's fault he only won eleven games last year. One stretch of fifteen starts last year Peavy won three games despite a 3.14 ERA averaging 7 innings a start.

Heck look at Cliff Lee. Only won 6 games somehow despite throwing 211 innings, 7 innings a start, with a 3.16 ERA. How that's possible on a .500 club I don't know. His teammates owe him some serious steak dinners, but you can't argue with his performance.