White Sox Interactive Forums
What's The Score?

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > What's The Score?
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46  
Old 08-20-2019, 07:27 AM
kobo kobo is online now
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lake in the Hills
Posts: 5,802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
He did, because it was another point of contention for the "hate on Law" crowd. I remember the discussion here. I'll try and look for something when I get a minute. But it was a very long time ago.
The trade was 3 years ago. That's not a "very long time ago". And if Law did say the Sox would regret the Tatis trade then he was the only one saying so. Here's a fangraphs article from June 5, 2016 talking about Tatis: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/evaluati...-shields-deal/


I can't find anything about what Law said at the time of the trade so maybe someone else will have better luck. But I really don't understand why this keeps being brought up. The trade happened in 2016 when the organization was still in win now mode. If they had been in rebuild mode at that time the trade never would have happened. Does it suck that Tatis blossomed into what he has become? Yes. But, the back injury he sustained is a serious concern, as well as his overall ability to stay healthy. A 20 year old SS with a back injury is not a good thing.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 08-20-2019, 09:41 AM
blandman blandman is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kobo View Post
The trade was 3 years ago. That's not a "very long time ago". And if Law did say the Sox would regret the Tatis trade then he was the only one saying so. Here's a fangraphs article from June 5, 2016 talking about Tatis: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/evaluati...-shields-deal/


I can't find anything about what Law said at the time of the trade so maybe someone else will have better luck. But I really don't understand why this keeps being brought up. The trade happened in 2016 when the organization was still in win now mode. If they had been in rebuild mode at that time the trade never would have happened. Does it suck that Tatis blossomed into what he has become? Yes. But, the back injury he sustained is a serious concern, as well as his overall ability to stay healthy. A 20 year old SS with a back injury is not a good thing.

You just completely dismissed the area a lot of us are most passionate about. The team was NOT in win now mode, or at least they SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN.

The team was smoke and mirrors. It was a hot start, but the statistics showed we were one of the worst teams in baseball. The media hounded this point. Law hounded this point. There were debates here. And what do the White Sox do? Mortgage the future in season to improve one of the worst rosters in baseball. And how did they try to do it? By trading for a washed up starter who's peripherals also showed that his recent abysmal performance was real.



Why does it keep getting brought up? Did Hahn get fired? This will be a topic until Hahn gets fired, or wins a World Series. Because he SHOULD have been fired. And its only going to sting worse over time, short of a redeeming World Championship. But anyone who understood how boneheaded that move was at the time (and NOT simply in retrospect, acting like it wasn't panned at the time is Hahn apologist) also believes Hahn doesn't DESERVE the chance to redeem himself here. So it's a topic. Forever and ever until he is fired.


On Law - the problem I'm having is that he's written so much about Tatis that it's hard to find one from that moment. But...

Here's John Sickels at the time. Mentioning that Tatis had above average bat speed and raw power. His downside was a possible need to shift positions. Not exactly the "lottery ticket" type prospect that people here lead you to believe he was. Raw prospect, sure. But a high ceiling guy. Extremely valuable piece.

https://www.minorleagueball.com/2016...nando-tatis-jr

Last edited by blandman; 08-20-2019 at 09:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 08-20-2019, 10:10 AM
voodoochile's Avatar
voodoochile voodoochile is offline
Soda Jerk/U.P.W./Lester Pooh Bear
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 58,475
Blog Entries: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
You just completely dismissed the area a lot of us are most passionate about. The team was NOT in win now mode, or at least they SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN.

The team was smoke and mirrors. It was a hot start, but the statistics showed we were one of the worst teams in baseball. The media hounded this point. Law hounded this point. There were debates here. And what do the White Sox do? Mortgage the future in season to improve one of the worst rosters in baseball. And how did they try to do it? By trading for a washed up starter who's peripherals also showed that his recent abysmal performance was real.



Why does it keep getting brought up? Did Hahn get fired? This will be a topic until Hahn gets fired, or wins a World Series. Because he SHOULD have been fired. And its only going to sting worse over time, short of a redeeming World Championship. But anyone who understood how boneheaded that move was at the time (and NOT simply in retrospect, acting like it wasn't panned at the time is Hahn apologist) also believes Hahn doesn't DESERVE the chance to redeem himself here. So it's a topic. Forever and ever until he is fired.


On Law - the problem I'm having is that he's written so much about Tatis that it's hard to find one from that moment. But...

Here's John Sickels at the time. Mentioning that Tatis had above average bat speed and raw power. His downside was a possible need to shift positions. Not exactly the "lottery ticket" type prospect that people here lead you to believe he was. Raw prospect, sure. But a high ceiling guy. Extremely valuable piece.

https://www.minorleagueball.com/2016...nando-tatis-jr
I think there might be a middle ground here. I admit I have dismissed the side that claims Tatis was a sure thing back then, but probably there is room for a compromise. Tatis may have been more valuable than the Sox had evaluated him as but he was also far from a sure thing and even Sickels in your article doesn't say he's anything other than some raw potential. Lots of guys are raw potential. The teams who figure out which ones are most likely to succeed are the ones who end up having successful minor league systems that leads to successful MLB teams.

Tatis was a miscalculation, but he wasn't a fireable offense, IMO. Lots of teams trade players who end up going on to be successful. Should the Cubs fire their GM because of the Quintana trade? Sox look like they are going to clean up on that one. At least Boston got a World Series win out of Sale. Sox appear to have killed the Eaton trade too. All three of those trades were executed by the guy you want fired for misreading a 17 YO kid who hadn't played his first game yet. Shouldn't we take Hahn's whole body of work into account? Should he get credit for signing Robert? Hahn appears to have won a lot more trades than he's lost especially as he got into rebuild mode.

Finally, whether you or anyone else believes the Sox SHOULD have been in "win now mode" the simple fact is they were and they believed it was the correct course of action at that time. They subsequently have changed direction and executed what appears on paper to be a very successful rebuild. I think his overall body of work at this time warrants a raise, not a termination, but yes his future will depend on whether the team reaches the levels we all hope they will.
__________________

Riding shotgun on the Sox bandwagon since before there was an Internet...
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 08-20-2019, 10:30 AM
blandman blandman is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoochile View Post
I think there might be a middle ground here. I admit I have dismissed the side that claims Tatis was a sure thing back then, but probably there is room for a compromise. Tatis may have been more valuable than the Sox had evaluated him as but he was also far from a sure thing and even Sickels in your article doesn't say he's anything other than some raw potential. Lots of guys are raw potential. The teams who figure out which ones are most likely to succeed are the ones who end up having successful minor league systems that leads to successful MLB teams.

Tatis was a miscalculation, but he wasn't a fireable offense, IMO. Lots of teams trade players who end up going on to be successful. Should the Cubs fire their GM because of the Quintana trade? Sox look like they are going to clean up on that one. At least Boston got a World Series win out of Sale. Sox appear to have killed the Eaton trade too. All three of those trades were executed by the guy you want fired for misreading a 17 YO kid who hadn't played his first game yet. Shouldn't we take Hahn's whole body of work into account? Should he get credit for signing Robert? Hahn appears to have won a lot more trades than he's lost especially as he got into rebuild mode.

Finally, whether you or anyone else believes the Sox SHOULD have been in "win now mode" the simple fact is they were and they believed it was the correct course of action at that time. They subsequently have changed direction and executed what appears on paper to be a very successful rebuild. I think his overall body of work at this time warrants a raise, not a termination, but yes his future will depend on whether the team reaches the levels we all hope they will.

I agree that it's not like Tatis was a can't miss guy. Honestly, the Shields acquisition itself is the worst part of this deal. There's just so much going on in this trade that it gets lost. Poor evaluation of team's own prospect. Poor evaluation of regressing veteran. Poor evaluation of talent on team's roster. I don't agree that it wasn't a fireable offense, but it's also not as bad as "they gave up Tatis!" Because you're right, he wasn't the Cubs giving up Eloy level.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 08-20-2019, 12:49 PM
rdivaldi rdivaldi is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago - Mayfair
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
Law regularly got **** here for not getting with the program on Dayan Viciedo, Jeremy Reed, and Jon Rauch. He gave the White Sox crap for trading away guys like Tatis and Gio Gonzalez. He had long standing issues with the way the team was operating internationally as well as it's drafting strategy, which minimized potential.
Considering Law was not a prospect analyst when the guys you mentioned were around, I'd say that this particular statement is full of inaccuracies.

Quote:
I understand why there's this impression of Law around here. But it's time to realize that he's not employed just to **** with us. He's pretty damn spot on when it comes to us, and unfortunately it's because we've operated so poorly for so long. He's been generally very positive on our rebuild, but the poor impression remains despite the reality of his analysis.
Spot on? What has been so "spot on" about Law? It's pretty easy to sit back and ramble on about how prospects will fail, because they do fail more often than not. He's bad at his job, I haven't seen any sort of revelations from any of his articles. He didn't even say anything about the Shields trade when it happened, he made his usual wild predictions after the fact.

Quote:
I don't understand your reasoning on they wanted TA first. Yeah...they wanted our top rated prospect at the time. And after that? Tatis is the guy they thought was next. Why did the Padres realize how good he was? Why did Law? What were these two separate entities doing that we had no idea about?
It's because NEITHER the Padres or Law had some sort of inside information about Tatis. Both thought of him as a risk. Your statement that the Padres and Law thought he was some sort of uber prospect is nonsense.

Quote:
That's what angers me more than the trade. Talent evaluation in the organization has been historically abysmal. Which is why we have a trade that people think is the worst of all time. You can't call it dumb luck when obviously two different parties knew the potential.
Then you're angry about NOTHING. It was skill and luck mixed together. You are completely making up some sort of story line. Neither the Padres or Law had any sort of great insight.
__________________
<a href=http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=3256 target=_blank>http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/v...achmentid=3256</a>

March 16, 2005 - Another happy Sox fan joins the party!
July 6, 2012 - 7 years later he's still part of it...
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 08-20-2019, 12:54 PM
rdivaldi rdivaldi is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago - Mayfair
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
Keith Law sure has held the top prospect analyst spot for the largest sports media company on the planet a long time for being terrible at his job.
Kotex Boy was like the lead sports writer for the Sun Times and landed a job at ESPN. Was he some sort of great writer? No, but he stirred the pot just like Law. Keith Law is bad at his job, he is notorious for getting most of his prospect information second hand.

Quote:
Law was right about this, and historically right about the White Sox. He was wrong on one guy - Sale - and meatheads have been dismissing his virtually flawless White Sox prospect analysis since.
Flawless, LOL. What has been so "flawless" about Law? Predicting that low level talent isn't going to pan out, wow! He's some sort of genius with those sort of predictions.

Quote:
You know who did? That guy you dismiss at bad at his job. Which is incredibly ironic.
LOL, Law didn't know squat. He's a pathetic "analyst" that stirs the pot to get clicks. You give him too much credit for making easy predictions and trumpeting one trade that he didn't even predict was going to be bad.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 08-20-2019, 04:46 PM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 20,727
Blog Entries: 1
Default

This has been beaten to death so many times, but here are a few thoughts I have:

Hahn isn’t a talent evaluator. He came up as a contract/finance guy. In the GM role, then, he has to lean on the talent evaluation people in the system. This is much the same way KW - whose background was in talent evaluation - often relied on Hahn to negotiate contracts (and deal with agents) when KW was GM.

Therefore, we can only deduce that the Padres organization had Tatis ranked more highly than the Sox did, and the Padres organization had Shields ranked worse than the Sox did.

In normal circumstances, Hahn should have held accountable the talent evaluation people who were wrong on BOTH Tatis AND Shields.

But I don’t believe Hahn alone has the power to hire and fire personnel. I think all those decisions have to be run by KW, and probably JR.

Short of complete malfeasance, I have a hard time arguing for the firing of a manager at any level when it’s his/her job to implement ownership philosophy according to ownership standards. Clearly loyalty and being a “team player” and returning a profit to shareholders are more important to JR than winning championships.

So say you fire Hahn. Who becomes GM? The answer is “someone else JR is comfortable with as GM; someone who will implement JR’s philosophy according to JR’s standards.”

Firing Hahn won’t fix anything. What’s the point?
__________________
The universe is the practical joke of the General at the expense of the Particular, quoth Frater Perdurabo, and laughed. The disciples nearest him wept, seeing the Universal Sorrow. Others laughed, seeing the Universal Joke. Others wept. Others laughed. Others wept because they couldn't see the Joke, and others laughed lest they should be thought not to see the Joke. But though FRATER laughed openly, he wept secretly; and really he neither laughed nor wept. Nor did he mean what he said.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 08-20-2019, 05:12 PM
ChiTownTrojan ChiTownTrojan is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Silver Spring, MD
Posts: 1,109
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
I agree that it's not like Tatis was a can't miss guy. Honestly, the Shields acquisition itself is the worst part of this deal. There's just so much going on in this trade that it gets lost. Poor evaluation of team's own prospect. Poor evaluation of regressing veteran. Poor evaluation of talent on team's roster. I don't agree that it wasn't a fireable offense, but it's also not as bad as "they gave up Tatis!" Because you're right, he wasn't the Cubs giving up Eloy level.
The bolded part I agree with. They thought they were buying low on a player and that they could fix him. They were wrong. This was a player they had been facing for years and presumably had a pretty good book on him and what made him successful. They probably admired him to a certain extent due to all the success he had had over the previous decade. At the time of the trade I thought that maybe they saw something in him that was fixable, but clearly it didn't work out that way. This was a failing on the parts of the scouts/talent evaluators who recommended Shields as a good target.

It's really hard to fault management for giving up Tatis before he had played a single professional game. It's clear that no other team expected that he would turn into what he has become, or else they would have outbid the Sox and signed him to begin with. He was a player with some raw talent, there are hundreds of players that fit that profile that never amount to anything. In a vacuum, "over-rated pitching prospect that you don't think will make it plus a young lottery ticket" isn't a terrible price to pay to buy low on an established MLB starter if you think he can turn his performance around.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 08-20-2019, 08:01 PM
voodoochile's Avatar
voodoochile voodoochile is offline
Soda Jerk/U.P.W./Lester Pooh Bear
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 58,475
Blog Entries: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
This has been beaten to death so many times, but here are a few thoughts I have:

Hahn isn’t a talent evaluator. He came up as a contract/finance guy. In the GM role, then, he has to lean on the talent evaluation people in the system. This is much the same way KW - whose background was in talent evaluation - often relied on Hahn to negotiate contracts (and deal with agents) when KW was GM.

Therefore, we can only deduce that the Padres organization had Tatis ranked more highly than the Sox did, and the Padres organization had Shields ranked worse than the Sox did.

In normal circumstances, Hahn should have held accountable the talent evaluation people who were wrong on BOTH Tatis AND Shields.

But I don’t believe Hahn alone has the power to hire and fire personnel. I think all those decisions have to be run by KW, and probably JR.

Short of complete malfeasance, I have a hard time arguing for the firing of a manager at any level when it’s his/her job to implement ownership philosophy according to ownership standards. Clearly loyalty and being a “team player” and returning a profit to shareholders are more important to JR than winning championships.

So say you fire Hahn. Who becomes GM? The answer is “someone else JR is comfortable with as GM; someone who will implement JR’s philosophy according to JR’s standards.”

Firing Hahn won’t fix anything. What’s the point?
Doesn't he get credit for the Sale, Eaton and Quintana trades or is one trade that didn't work out when the player went on to become a very good young player on the rise the only trade that matters?

Can you explain WHY after he clearly won two of those other three trades and probably broke even minimum on the third he deserves to still be fired?

The third trade being Moncada and Kopech for Sale - which certainly look like a solid return . Heck, Moncada by himself might be a solid return for Sale given the number of years of team control and where the team was at then and where it is at now.

Does the evaluation of Hahn end at Tatis?
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 08-21-2019, 05:42 AM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 20,727
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoochile View Post
Doesn't he get credit for the Sale, Eaton and Quintana trades or is one trade that didn't work out when the player went on to become a very good young player on the rise the only trade that matters?

Can you explain WHY after he clearly won two of those other three trades and probably broke even minimum on the third he deserves to still be fired?

The third trade being Moncada and Kopech for Sale - which certainly look like a solid return . Heck, Moncada by himself might be a solid return for Sale given the number of years of team control and where the team was at then and where it is at now.

Does the evaluation of Hahn end at Tatis?
Voodoo, my position actually is closer to yours.

Hahn’s record is mixed - some wins (as you cite) and some losses (as his critics cite).

I don’t think he should be fired because it wouldn’t solve anything.

What the organization needs is for JR to change or to sell the team, so that KW/Hahn actually is empowered instead of hamstrung.

Since neither of those will happen, I place my hope in these factors:

1. Under JR the Sox have executed three successful rebuild projects: early 1980s (mostly through trades and free agency, culminating with the 1983 club), late 80s (with a mix of draftees, trades, and astute free agent signings culminating in 93-94), and late 90s (with a mix of draftees and international signings and astute trades, culminating in 2005 and 2008).

2. Hahn recognizes that the decade of failure starting in 2009 was the result of trying to wring more titles out of an aging core by selling off every prospect in the system, plus the Doug Wilder scandal, plus draft bonus cheapness, and has therefore prioritized building a better player development system.

3. Hawk has retired, and therefore his influence on JR has diminished, and therefore the Hahn can convince JR to allow him to hire more staff who know how to use advanced analytics - which Hawk believes are bunk - to improve prospect/player performance (like Matt Lisle).
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 08-21-2019, 11:57 AM
DumpJerry's Avatar
DumpJerry DumpJerry is offline
Tom Feargal Hagen
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The hearts and minds of Sox fans on 10-26-05
Posts: 28,263
Default


This again. When will it ever end?
__________________


2020....2020.....2020....2020....2020.....
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 08-21-2019, 01:15 PM
ChiTownTrojan ChiTownTrojan is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Silver Spring, MD
Posts: 1,109
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DumpJerry View Post

This again. When will it ever end?
Assuming a 20-year career for Tatis, we'll probably stop hearing about it after his HOF induction in 2045.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 08-21-2019, 02:43 PM
TommyJohn TommyJohn is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,915
Blog Entries: 384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownTrojan View Post
Assuming a 20-year career for Tatis, we'll probably stop hearing about it after his HOF induction in 2045.
We will hear it into the 22nd century and beyond. As the sun starts to swell into a red giant, dooming mankind, those alive at the time will still be talking about the Tatis trade. As well as the time the Sox wore shorts and when Nolan Ryan gave Robin Ventura a Texas Tapdown.

Last edited by TommyJohn; 08-21-2019 at 06:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 08-21-2019, 06:46 PM
voodoochile's Avatar
voodoochile voodoochile is offline
Soda Jerk/U.P.W./Lester Pooh Bear
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 58,475
Blog Entries: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownTrojan View Post
Assuming a 20-year career for Tatis, we'll probably stop hearing about it after his HOF induction in 2045.
At least we've managed to move past the Black Sox stuff for the most part.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 08-21-2019, 08:09 PM
FielderJones's Avatar
FielderJones FielderJones is offline
WSI Village Atheist
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Clarendon Hills
Posts: 6,115
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownTrojan View Post
Assuming a 20-year career for Tatis, we'll probably stop hearing about it after his HOF induction in 2045.

I assumed a 20-year career for Joe Crede too, before he hurt his back.



http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/fantasy/injuries/sd.jsp#team135
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:27 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.