Around the League: 2017 offseason edition / 2018 Season
- Thread starter bravesfanforlife88
- Start date
Sale had probably the best contract in the MLB. Eaton's was also great.
The Eaton trade looks bad, saved only by the fact that he's had severe injuries since it.
No prospect is a sure thing. But they didn't sell themselves short when they traded Eaton which is what you want to try and avoid.
That whole trade has been a cluster **** for both sides. I'm sure the Nats would like a mulligan as well so they could have moved those guys, while they had value, for something useful to help their team.
His K rate is what is going to determine whether he is a good player or a superstar. At 22 he can take a walk, hit the **** out of the ball, and play average to above average defense at 2nd. Those are all great qualities. Just getting his K rate into the 20's would make him a superstar imo but it won't be easy.
injuries are one thing, and eaton had been pretty healthy.
the shine was already wearing off giolito when they dealt for him. lopez wasn't a stud IIRC but was still good.
i thought at the time it was a weak trade and it still looks that way. eaton had a great contract coming off a 5.8 fWAR year. so far the white sox have gotten back basically nothing if you consider how terrible giolito has been.
The results haven't been the best. But the Sox got the 19th and 28th prospect at the time plus a former first round pick. The process was correct even if the results haven't been so far.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
Sometimes you can’t look at rank the same. Giolito was tumbling when the trade was made. Clear signs he had some major control flaws. Lopez was decent but riding helium. Not a bad pickup though. I just thought the gNats got lucky making Gio the headliner.
He fell because he had poor performance at the big league level in 2016. Similar to how Albies dropped from 8th to 25th in 3 months due to a slow start at AAA last year.
it wasn't just that. people were questioning his stuff and calling him a possible RP at the time. i remember it clearly.
matt is also right: lopez was riding helium.
they could've done better, even at the time, for a guy coming off 5.8 fWAR with an outstanding contract.
LOL, I love these hot takes with the benefit of hindsight!
The ChiSox did not tie dead money to their valuable MLB assets. They did not water down the returns by taking back MLB players. They did not hold onto a guy to waste his value during the rebuild (though one could argue they did that a bit with Abreu depending on what type of return he could have gotten).
They absolutely maximized the future value they received in exchange for their MLB assets.
The ChiSox performed the tear down part of the rebuild flawlessly. Everything after that...not so much.
The ChiSox did not tie dead money to their valuable MLB assets. They did not water down the returns by taking back MLB players. They did not hold onto a guy to waste his value during the rebuild (though one could argue they did that a bit with Abreu depending on what type of return he could have gotten).
They absolutely maximized the future value they received in exchange for their MLB assets.
The ChiSox performed the tear down part of the rebuild flawlessly. Everything after that...not so much.
Was it the same people that said we should trade Albies because we have TD? He was still a highly rated prospect. He didn't have a fall like Allard did.
To be fair. People here were NOT saying that Albies could be traded because we had TD. They were speculating about whether TD plus what we could get for Albies in a trade would have greater value than just Albies. Stupid scenario at this point, obviously, but nobody seriously thought TD was going to be better than Oz.
i don't know? it was prospect people. i don't think prospect people ever said that about albies, so i don't know what you're talking about. there were doubts about giolito at the time. washington was all-in on trading him at the time.
and i disagree. and i said it at the time, too. their return for Eaton wasn't enough, IMO. and it's turned out to be true, as well. so what are you going on about?
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
Lol Cano
Really? Because the surplus value matched almost perfectly.
The process was to get the most future value available. That's what they did. They shopped around and took the best offer in terms of future value. They did not shackle dead money to Eaton. They did not waste value on getting MLB assets in return.
Whether or not you agree with the package is irrelevant. What happened to Eaton or the prospects after the trade is irrelevant.
I agree. He could be prime Jose Bautista with better defense if he can get that K rate down. Not sure he'll have a 50 HR peak, but 30 homer average with some peak years near or over 40+ is definitely possible. That's essentially a consistent 6 WAR player with some peak years in around 7 or above. But he won't sniff that striking out 30+ percent of the time.
Heyward
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br>'13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner
Quintana deal was really good, Eloy for him is great value.
Eaton deal for both sides is a L, cant say much there.
Sale deal looks good for both sides as well.
Getting Rutherford for DRob and Kahnle was good.
But that isnt a very good team, but rebuilds take minimum 3 years to perfect if you do them right, we'll say this is year 1 for them.
Eaton deal for both sides is a L, cant say much there.
Sale deal looks good for both sides as well.
Getting Rutherford for DRob and Kahnle was good.
But that isnt a very good team, but rebuilds take minimum 3 years to perfect if you do them right, we'll say this is year 1 for them.