White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
And away we go...

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Sox Clubhouse
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 07-05-2017, 11:36 PM
anewman35 anewman35 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Buffalo Grove, IL
Posts: 3,273
Default

The idea that the team would start a huge rebuild because of some personality conflicts is just ridiculous to me. For a few years, they tried the "add pieces to the core" thing, and it didn't work. You can say they didn't add the right pieces, or enough of them, and you may be right. That doesn't change the fact that the non-Rebuild 2017 would have quite likely been more of the same - adding a couple midlevel people to the same old core and just hoping we could get lucky. It may have worked. Or it may have been 2016 again. We'll never know, but I'm glad they took the gamble. I LOVED Chris Sale, but id rather have a contending team soon then a few more years of an amazing ace on a team that's going nowhere.

As an aside, I don't really think you can compare a rebuild in 2017 to the 50s. Things are very obviously different now...
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-06-2017, 12:28 AM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 17,832
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LITTLE NELL View Post
I'm not sure how many teams in MLB history traded away their 2 best players in starting a rebuild, for example I remember the Cubs in the 50s and early 60s going through about 3 rebuilds but they never traded Ernie Banks. My take on the whole thing is that the cart came before the horse with Sale and Eaton pissing off management to the point that the FO decided to trade them and start a rebuild. If there were no issues last year with those 2, they never would have been traded and the club could have added pieces or started a rebuild around those 2.
It isn't just that the rebuild started with the trade of those two. It's that these were the only players the White Sox have traded in rebuild deals since the end of last season.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-06-2017, 04:02 AM
Grzegorz Grzegorz is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Suburbs
Posts: 2,616
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
Is a source needed for something you don't want to believe but the assumption that Sale's relationship was strained and wouldn't have signed an extension should be a presumptive fact?

If Sale's relationship was strained, perhaps because he believed the White Sox are more interested in selling souvenir jerseys than building a winning team, are you suggesting a source is needed to show that Rick Hahn had nothing to do with the White Sox not building a winning team?

Hahn has been the White Sox GM since the 2012 World Series. He has his fingerprints all over the White Sox not being able to build a winning team this decade. Does anyone who finds him blameless for not building a winning team during his tenure need to cite a source?

If you are going to take as presumptive evidence that Sale was alienated by the team and wouldn't have signed an extension, you also have to presume that the general manager for the last four seasons of Sale's tenure with the White Sox bears some of the responsibility for the alienation.

I don't think anyone who is arguing that it has taken so long for Quintana to be traded because Hahn is looking for the right deal could argue that that Sale was shopped to the same extent. Sale was traded on the third day of the winter meetings, kicking off a flurry of one additional offseason rebuilding trade.

Does your faith in Rick Hahn require a confirmation source?
I asked for a source because you imply Sale was not shopped enough but the price on Q was prohibitive. I am just wondering what Sale should have returned as compared to what Q could have returned.
__________________
“There were a few hard rules, but everybody was unique, and he understood that. George’s great strength was he didn’t overcoach. There’s no place for panic on the mound.” - Jim Palmer on George Bamberger “Arms and the man,” Sports Illustrated, April 19, 2004
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-06-2017, 06:26 AM
TomBradley72 TomBradley72 is online now
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Antioch, IL
Posts: 6,315
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
It isn't just that the rebuild started with the trade of those two. It's that these were the only players the White Sox have traded in rebuild deals since the end of last season.
Give it 25 more days-
__________________
TomBradley72
http://sabr.org/bioproj/person/334c0314
2017 Record: 2-2
2005-2016 Record: 56-44
MLB Parks Visited: 25, MiLB Parks Visited: 18
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-06-2017, 07:12 AM
TommyJohn TommyJohn is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,652
Blog Entries: 230
Default

When are all of you going to learn that a rebuild isn't a true rebuild when it involves only two trades? Uh.

And no team ever ever ever successfully built themselves into a winner by trading a once-in-a-century legend, so that means this so-called rebuild is automatically doomed to failure.
__________________
I am Dabuiek
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-06-2017, 07:16 AM
kobo kobo is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lake in the Hills
Posts: 5,216
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tragg View Post
You never know for sure. But teams make trades in early July and even June (as our FO well knows.....). If you like the deal, take it.
It doesn't matter from the Sox perspective when they make a trade, as long as they do make trades for the guys with expiring contracts plus D Rob.
Which is rare. If there is a move to be made the team will make the move. The only reason I see for being impatient right now is due to not trusting that this is a rebuild.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-06-2017, 07:19 AM
kobo kobo is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lake in the Hills
Posts: 5,216
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
Is a source needed for something you don't want to believe but the assumption that Sale's relationship was strained and wouldn't have signed an extension should be a presumptive fact?

If Sale's relationship was strained, perhaps because he believed the White Sox are more interested in selling souvenir jerseys than building a winning team, are you suggesting a source is needed to show that Rick Hahn had nothing to do with the White Sox not building a winning team?

Hahn has been the White Sox GM since the 2012 World Series. He has his fingerprints all over the White Sox not being able to build a winning team this decade. Does anyone who finds him blameless for not building a winning team during his tenure need to cite a source?

If you are going to take as presumptive evidence that Sale was alienated by the team and wouldn't have signed an extension, you also have to presume that the general manager for the last four seasons of Sale's tenure with the White Sox bears some of the responsibility for the alienation.

I don't think anyone who is arguing that it has taken so long for Quintana to be traded because Hahn is looking for the right deal could argue that that Sale was shopped to the same extent. Sale was traded on the third day of the winter meetings, kicking off a flurry of one additional offseason rebuilding trade.

Does your faith in Rick Hahn require a confirmation source?
You are ignoring the role the Executive VP played in all of this the last few years which I believe led to the strained relationship between Sale and the FO. I believe that is more of a factor than anything Hahn might have done.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-06-2017, 07:24 AM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 18,917
Blog Entries: 1
Default

The Cubs didn't have to trade Ernie Banks around their rebuilds because free agency didn't exist and they never had to worry about losing him.

I didn't like the idea of trading Sale and Eaton. I would have preferred to draft well to surround them with better talent.

But once it happened, there was no use crying over spilled milk.

Now that it's happened, we need to go all-in. Trading the short-term veterans is a no-brainer. I can actually go either way on Quintana since he could still be under his current contract by the time they are decent again.

Signing Robert was a great move, but now they are effectively locked out from signing elite international amateur talent for two years, so their only hope of getting elite talent now is through the draft, and the best elite hitting talent is most likely to be found at the top of the draft, which therefore necessitates the Sox losing as much as possible this year and next year to get the highest possible draft picks in 2018 and 2019.
__________________
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
  #24  
Old 07-06-2017, 08:00 AM
Tragg Tragg is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gonzales LA
Posts: 14,447
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kobo View Post
Which is rare. If there is a move to be made the team will make the move. The only reason I see for being impatient right now is due to not trusting that this is a rebuild.
There's another reason: I don't trust Hahn's ability to pull off 3 trades in a week, much less 6 or so that he needs to make....

Not common, but they happen. Last year, there were trades on 6/30, 7/7...the first trade of anyone of note was the Pomeranz trade on 7/14 and then the Vogelbach/Montgomery trade on 7/21.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
I didn't like the idea of trading Sale and Eaton. I would have preferred to draft well to surround them with better talent.

But once it happened, there was no use crying over spilled milk.

Now that it's happened, we need to go all-in. Trading the short-term veterans is a no-brainer. I can actually go either way on Quintana since he could still be under his current contract by the time they are decent again.

Signing Robert was a great move, but now they are effectively locked out from signing elite international amateur talent for two years,
Sale was a generational talent - tough to trade period. I thought trading Eaton would have been a good idea even if not rebuilding - he was never as good as his numbers suggested, imo. and I figured that the Sox could get 2 good players for 1.
As for Robert, I agree but it's not like the Sox were signing elite amateur talent anyway - so if they were willing to go all in, even if just for 1 player, fine with me.
And that's the reason they are in this mess: for the last 15 years, they have drafted and signed poorly. Even pitching, perhaps especially pitching - the couldn't even find 5th starters out of the system to put around Sale, Q and Rodon. They couldn't or didn't fix Fulmer's delivery, so it looks like he's toast.

Last edited by Tragg; 07-06-2017 at 08:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-06-2017, 08:16 AM
guillensdisciple guillensdisciple is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 16,765
Default

We will make a couple of trades before the deadline. Especially in the bullpen. I am not so sure about Quintana right now, however.


EDIT: can we expect a top 50 prospect for Robertson?
__________________
http://arsenalist.com/video/?id=xh2dx6

Greatest Arsenal goal I have ever witnessed. Chills to this day watching it.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-06-2017, 08:39 AM
Chez's Avatar
Chez Chez is online now
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Clarendon Hills
Posts: 6,047
Default

Here's who I think will get traded before the deadline (and my guess to their destinations):


Robertson and Jennings to Washington,
Frazier and Swarzak to Boston,
Holland to NYY, and
Quintana to Houston (though I have a sinking feeling he may end up on the North Side).


Melkey stays for now. Anyone else with predictions?
__________________
2017 Attendance Tracker: 6-5

All time Sox Attendance Tracker:
271-232.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-06-2017, 10:27 AM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 18,917
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tragg View Post
There's another reason: I don't trust Hahn's ability to pull off 3 trades in a week, much less 6 or so that he needs to make....

Not common, but they happen. Last year, there were trades on 6/30, 7/7...the first trade of anyone of note was the Pomeranz trade on 7/14 and then the Vogelbach/Montgomery trade on 7/21.



Sale was a generational talent - tough to trade period. I thought trading Eaton would have been a good idea even if not rebuilding - he was never as good as his numbers suggested, imo. and I figured that the Sox could get 2 good players for 1.
As for Robert, I agree but it's not like the Sox were signing elite amateur talent anyway - so if they were willing to go all in, even if just for 1 player, fine with me.
And that's the reason they are in this mess: for the last 15 years, they have drafted and signed poorly. Even pitching, perhaps especially pitching - the couldn't even find 5th starters out of the system to put around Sale, Q and Rodon. They couldn't or didn't fix Fulmer's delivery, so it looks like he's toast.

I'm agnostic on Hahn. Some folks probably will never give him credit even if he earns it. Some of his moves were bad, like Shields. Others were great, like trading for Eaton. It's the same way with other GMs: they all make great trades and lousy trades and neutral trades.

Some GMs have more to trade and therefore can get more talent in return. Throughout Hahn's tenure, he's rarely had anything decent to trade to get back great talent.

Very few GMs are able to trade garbage and get back diamonds; perhaps the Sox have been spoiled in the past by deals to acquire Bartolo Colon for little of consequence, Freddy Garcia for little of consequence (as it turns out; some of us- including me - were aghast at the time at dealing away what we did), turning Loaiza's career year into Jose Contreras, getting Jake Peavy for little of consequence. Or, further back, turning Jose DeLeon into Lance Johnson, turning little of consequence into Tim Raines, turning Harold Baines into Alvarez and Sosa and Fred Manrique into Scott Fletcher. (Given that we always seemed one hitter short in the early 90s, maybe we would have been better off not making that deal, and having Harold DH to protect Frank. But then we still would have needed a right fielder and we would have needed a third starter behind McDowell and Fernandez. Would a lineup consisting of Raines, Ventura, Thomas, Baines, Ellis Burks, Karkovice, Cora, Guillen, Johnson, with Bo Jackson as a pinch hitter, have been able to outslug the Blue Jays in 1993?)

Coming out of college, Fulmer was seen as a guy likely destined for the bullpen, with the possibility of becoming a mid-rotation starter. We Sox fans were spoiled by Sale's and Rodon's quick ascension into the majors and into the rotation that I think we came to expect Fulmer would be starting for us by now. He's not a bust if he becomes a high-leverage reliever, and it's still very likely that he and Burdi could be an exceptionally strong back end of the pen. Moreover, with increasing reliance on relievers, it wouldn't be terrible if Fulmer, Burdi, AND Kopech end up in the bullpen, provided that the rotation consists of Rodon (and Quintana?) and three among Hansen, Giolito, Lopez, Dunning, and Stephens.

The Sox have chosen a direction; now they need to do a bang-up job at it.

If on August 1 all of Frazier, Melky and Robertson remain, I'll be the first to rip Hahn. Until then, I'll suspend judgment and await results.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-06-2017, 10:41 AM
Tragg Tragg is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gonzales LA
Posts: 14,447
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
I'm agnostic on Hahn. Some folks probably will never give him credit even if he earns it. Some of his moves were bad, like Shields. Others were great, like trading for Eaton. It's the same way with other GMs: they all make great trades and lousy trades and neutral trades.

Some GMs have more to trade and therefore can get more talent in return. Throughout Hahn's tenure, he's rarely had anything decent to trade to get back great talent.
Until now (or really 6 months ago). I'd say he has more to trade in a rebuilding situation than any GM in at least a decade; way more than the Astros or Cubs had.
The Shields trade wasn't just a bad trade - it was negligence.
But it's not personal, and he gets all of the credit in the world from me if he fixes this. I hope he does and I think he can because the one thing he has done well as GM was trading for young players such as Eaton as you pointed out. He should have done more of it, rather than reaching for declining/overrated veterans.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-06-2017, 10:48 AM
TomBradley72 TomBradley72 is online now
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Antioch, IL
Posts: 6,315
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
.

If on August 1 all of Frazier, Melky and Robertson remain, I'll be the first to rip Hahn. Until then, I'll suspend judgment and await results.
Exactly.

So many posters here seem to be oblivious to the fact that NO ONE is making trades right now (or pretty much after the winter meetings last off season)- it's not like quality rotation starters, closers and 3rd basemen are flying off the shelves but Hahn is on the sidelines- there's just no movement right now and the contenders are the one's that control that part of the equation.

There is always a flurry of activity all the way up midnight the day of the deadline, The overall grade for phase one of the rebuild will be established the morning after the deadline in 25 days.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-06-2017, 11:02 AM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 17,832
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grzegorz View Post
I asked for a source because you imply Sale was not shopped enough but the price on Q was prohibitive. I am just wondering what Sale should have returned as compared to what Q could have returned.
The Sox began the process by trading Sale. Either the process ended with the Eaton trade or Hahn has been more deliberate in working deals for Quintana and others.

You can generally get more in trade for players in the offseason than in July. Maybe you don't believe that, but in the offseason you have more teams looking to add veteran talent and fewer teams looking to sell veteran talent. The exception is with relief pitchers because contenders tend to burn them out in the process of contending. Teams that may not have been in the market for a relief pitcher in January, may be in need of a couple in July. Teams lose starters as well, but if they need to patch a starting rotation, a pitcher who is on the verge of free agency will likely be more attractive than a pitcher who comes with a commitment because the former is cheaper.

Aside from Sale and Eaton, the trades the White Sox rebuild trades have been more deliberate. It seems unlikely that a team trading veterans in the offseason would wait for the trade deadline to make the buik of their rebuild deals. During the offseason, teams are looking to build for the upcoming season. At the deadline, a few teams are looking to fill holes as cheaply as possible.

Consider, too, that the White Sox are not looking for major league-ready talent. The Sale trade announced that there was a rebuild. The longer it takes to acquire the talent that will need to be developed, the longer the White Sox will be in rebuild mode.

Obviously, the the White Sox will be trading players facing free agency at the deadline. Their value will be lower than it would have been in the offseason, not because they went 0-for-5 Sunday or whatever, but because instead of getting a player in their last year of his contract, a team would be getting a player for two months and the postseason.

The Sox will trade Holland, in whom thy have no investment, but they couldn't have traded him in the offseason. They will trade Cabrera to a contender who would have had to pay more for him in January. They dealt Dunn in the last year of his contract. While there may be more interest in Frazier now than there was a few months ago, there isn't blockbuster-trade interest. Economically, there is no reason for them to get more for Quintana in July than they could have gotten in January.

Since the Sale trade, which started the rebuild, the trades have been more deliberate, and there really has only been one of any consequence.

Maybe I'm wrong. A year ago, the Padres found a general manager willing to deal for Shields. Maybe Hahn will be so lucky.
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 10:27 AM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.