30 Jul 2021 20:14:48
LOLOLOLOL.
Alexander Canario and Caleb Kilian for Kris Bryant.
When I said Canario + Dubon, y'all pretended like I had no idea what I was talking about.
FWIW, Dubon > Kilian.
31 Jul 2021 01:58:05
For some reason this posted in the other chat. but I sent this out earlier.
“ Nate you were spot on for KB. Giants with an absolute steal. Cubs made out really solid on Kimbrel, Rizzo, Baez but the return for KB was subpar. I was wrong about that one. ”
With that being said you were very off on Kimbrel and you were adamant that Rich Rod would get a better return. Sometimes you hit sometimes you don’t. I’m just glad they got a P with some upside over Dubon lol.
31 Jul 2021 02:46:38
The Cubs were wise to take on money for Rizzo, Chafin and Baez. They took teams who were being stupid cheap and took advantage of them. Good move by Hoyer.
He totally lost the leverage battle on KB, though. Waiting to move him, Zaidi knew that Hoyer wasn't going to trade Rizzo, Baez, Kimbrel, and others, but keep Bryant. There was no point.
He also knew that what he offered was much, much better than anything he'd get in the compensation pick.
By 3:50 (EST), Hoyer had no choice but to accept a weakened offer for Bryant.
31 Jul 2021 04:03:16
Nate and his victory laps. A match made in heaven.
31 Jul 2021 05:43:22
Hey, how'd that Trevor Story for 3 40 FV prospects work out for the White Sox?
Asking for a friend.
31 Jul 2021 07:38:04
He definitely lost the KB leverage. Kimbrel was always the prize of the deadline for them and it showed. Overall solid day but agreed Jed waited too long on KB or should have tried to pair someone like Davies with him. Pairing Javy with Trevor Williams to land a prospect like Pete Crow Armstrong was a great move.
31 Jul 2021 13:30:09
The Cubs also added $5M to get PCA from the Mets.
It's actually pretty sad when the biggest market teams are being massive cheapskates, but Hoyer took advantage of it.
I don't see a scenario where Hoyer was getting anything more than Canario/ Toribio from the Giants.
31 Jul 2021 20:35:50
The Rockies would have been better off trading Story for “3 40s” (Sheets and Ramos are no longer 40s, but that’s beside the point) . Their FO’s incompetence is astonishing.
Hernandez is fine.
01 Aug 2021 03:47:53
I truly appreciate the Motte and Bailey argument.
Motte: The Rockies would totally accept Ramos, Sheets, and Thompson. Story isn't that good!
Bailey: The Rockies would be better off trading Story for literal trash.
Never mind that your "Bailey" is also largely nonsensical. The Rockies may not have been better off. Bill Schmidt is an excellent drafter and may feel better about getting a compensation pick (where he has a much fuller gamut to choose from) as opposed to the weak offers he felt they received.
I personally believe they should have traded Story, but if they were getting the ludicrously awful returns like you projected, I don't blame them for not moving Story.
In a vacuum, something is always better than nothing. In the real world, that's simply not true.
01 Aug 2021 04:33:09
What are you talking about? The Rockies will not get a comp pick that is more valuable than Sheets + Ramos + Thompson, and this package wasn’t even likely on the table or they would have done it. Story, given his unimpressive numbers this year thus far, wasn’t as sought after as they hoped. They severely overplayed their hand.
Your only reason why you feel this is a bad return is because they were ranked as 40s by FanGraphs after not playing affiliated games for more than a year. Fangraphs and Baseball America prospects guys both said that if you’re basing your current evaluation on those pre-season rankings, you are foolish.
Hahn figured he may as well cheaply grab Hernandez (as he knew trading Madrigal was on the table) who has a no risk team option for next year than try and negotiate too hard with a Rockies staff that clearly doesn’t know left from right. Hernandez could easily be just as valuable as Story ROS.
Story should have been traded last off season with Arenado. I underestimated their incompetence, which is pretty universally accepted within the baseball community. You sticking up for their strategy is a strange, yet, I guess, fitting summary here.
01 Aug 2021 11:43:51
"if you’re basing your current evaluation on those pre-season rankings, you are foolish. "
For starters, I follow JJ Cooper, and I saw that tweet. It's also why I think it's a good thing that I decided to use their mid-season updates for the basis, and not their preseason ratings. Mind you, Cooper mentioned RANKINGS, as in a team's #13 vs. another's #5, not their "rating", as in their FV.
And also, just because their preseason rankings may not be 100% accurate doesn't equate to them being ridiculously inaccurate either. It doesn't suddenly mean that because Bryan Ramos was a 40-grade back in December that he's not one now. Or that we should just view him as a 45-grade prospect. You have no evidence for why they are higher now. None. The midseason updates don't agree with you, either.
In fact, for MANY prospects, the lack of a 2020 season will probably drop their values. Losing a full season of work might actually hurt them.
So it's not surprising that the Rockies would just decide to say, "screw it, we'll see what we can get in the draft" and take some moderate-upside HS looking for an overslot bonus at the end of the 1st Round. They may feel better about getting someone who hasn't missed as much baseball, honestly.
01 Aug 2021 11:50:55
"You sticking up for their strategy is a strange, yet, I guess, fitting summary here. "
Never mind that I even said, and I quote, "I personally believe they should have traded Story, but if they were getting the ludicrously awful returns like you projected, I don't blame them for not moving Story. "
It's okay to not pile on, Jeremiah. It's okay to step away from the massive group think that is "OMGGGGG the Rockies FO is terrible! " and perhaps try to think, "why did they do this? What was their reasoning? "
When you figure out "why", you may not agree, but if nothing else, you have more context.
Frankly, you've never once been interested in context. You sit back and say, "wow, a White Sox home run" and your brain goes into overdrive. And you think that being in agreement with JJ Cooper (and acting like no one else has seen his stuff. He has 48K followers LOL) makes you uber smart.
But I guess you should go enjoy Seby Zavala crank out home runs in White Sox losses. You can't use Craig Kimbrel when Michael Kopech is getting shelled by the Indians.
01 Aug 2021 16:35:34
The White Sox got an in-division Cesar Hernandez for a 35+-40 FV Konnor Pilkington who has the ceiling of a 5th starter. Hernandez is having a better season that Story and is projected to be worth less than .5 fWAR ROS worse than Story.
The Rockies would have been lucky to get a package for Sheets, Thompson, and Ramos. Again, a package that is worth more than anything they can get with a comp pick. You called this package ludicrously awful. It just doesn’t make sense. With that logic, any player they get for Story next July will be a ludicrously awful return. Your take was
demonstrably terrible — proven by this weeks trades, yet you will continue to defend it rather than just admitting you were off.
Oh and about Kopech, i’m sure still no one would trade for him given his “off-the-field issues”. How’s that take working for you? Oof. And Kimbrel looked great last night despite Kopech’s struggles. Having Kimbrel and Hendriks for 6-12 outs in a playoff game is insane. It’s such a unique advantage.
At least we know you’re following every Sox game now. Hey, enjoy the ride of rooting against them for the last 2 months that mean nothing more than playoff seeding for them.
01 Aug 2021 21:29:06
"I’m sure still no one would trade for him given his “off-the-field issues”
Well, considering he's still on the Chicago White Sox, I'm not sure what your angle is here. He didn't get traded. And as far as I saw, his name never got brought up in trade discussions.
So my take is correct, I guess?
And yes, his mental health issues make him almost unmovable. That's not a critique of him as a person, but a reality of the world. If you think that's a crazy take, then it's evident you've never had to hire anyone or manage anyone.
01 Aug 2021 21:38:18
"yet you will continue to defend it rather than just admitting you were off. "
Once again, how was I off? We legitimately have zero clue what Trevor Story would have been traded for. None. Your idea was nothing more than that: an idea. And I'm sure if it were enough, Trevor Story would have been traded. Alas, he was not.
Your only basis for me being "off" is that you didn't like my opinion LOL.
It's okay to acknowledge you haven't had a single accurate idea or take on this site. Not one. Ever. And maybe, when someone else absolutely nails a projection (a projection you mocked, FWIW), you should probably sit back and recognize your place in both this world, and this website.
01 Aug 2021 21:50:47
"Again, a package that is worth more than anything they can get with a comp pick"
Yet again, an unconfirmed take from Chi Sox. You truly are desperate, aren't you? Do you need to be right for a change? I can sense your frustration over watching someone else be right. It's okay, really.
But there's no way you can confirm this take, like, at all. Because:
A) Prospect Value is entirely subjective and varies between outlets, teams, and changes based on the year. Next year, by July, there's a very decent chance that one of those three will be a 35-grade guys, if not more.
B) You have no idea who the Rockies will land. We're not talking a 5th round pick. We're talking a potential 1st Round pick (provided Story signs for 50M this winter, which I believe he will) . You don't think there's ANY chance the Rockies sign someone at a 45 FV that falls to the end of the 1st Round? None?
Your confidence is nothing but ridiculous arrogance, and again, it's just proof of your desperation to be correct about something. You REALLY need to take a break from this. It's a horrible look for you, and to be honest, it takes quite a bit for you to look any worse than you have as of late here.
I'm sure you can go find a children's museum and impress them with your superior baseball knowledge. You haven't impressed anyone here.
02 Aug 2021 01:15:22
It’s not a coincidence that i’m not the only who has acknowledged your superiority complex on here. It’s a terribly ugly look and you’re a big reason why there isn’t much action on this site, unfortunately.
You were completely wrong about Michael Kopech, and still are. You doubted his ability to turn his talent into production on the field with a low blow at his mental health, and now that he’s a stud, you’re pettily going to hide behind a terrible logical fallacy. “Oh yeah well he was never traded so we have no idea what he’s worth. ” Lmao sure dude. If he hadn’t already lost his prospect status, Michael Kopech would be a top-10 prospect in baseball after what he’s done to this point.
He throws a 97-100 mph fastball with 92nd percentile vertical break vs avg. with 70th percentile horizontal break. Pair that with 2 plus breaking balls and a good enough changeup and no apparent command/ control issues that the industry was worried about, but yeah, he’s surely “unmovable”.
Ever heard of Baseball Savant, Nate? Do yourself a favor and glean at all of the Red ink splattered over Michael Kopech’s page.
Saying that he’s unmovable when the White Sox had to make clear to teams last week that he was untouchable when a lot asked about him, is yet another hilariously bad take from you. You say the most nonsensical things with anything to do with the White Sox, and are now actively searching out their results praying for loses so that you can come on here as say “SEE, I TOLD YOU ALL” a couple more times to make yourself feel good. Quite sad, IMO
It is very unlikely the Rockies will get a 45 at the comp pick. It’s not even a guarantee that he gets $50 million as even you have to qualify that you “believe he will”. If he continues to produce at this rate, are you handing a SS coming off a 85 wRC+ season with issues throwing the ball $50+ million. You at least have to think hard about it, no matter Story’s pedigree
“We legitimately have zero what Trevor Story would have been traded for”
Uh, well, no Nate. This is blatantly false once again (*my goodness*) . There are many comparable cases from this past week, all of which having better seasons than Story, that give us a great idea of what would have been on the table for Story.
What we do know about a prospective Story deal is based on what others at his position garnered. Again, did Cesar Hernandez, who’s having a better season than Story, get anything close to Sheets + Ramos + Thompson? Absolutely not.
How about Baez? He got only $1 million more in prospect value (with numbers you cited) than my package and he’s been literally 21% better at the plate and is in the conversation for the best defensive SS in baseball.
Eduardo Escobar? Nope, my package is still superior, and so is Escobar as a player this year.
So, in reality, we do know what Story would’ve have relatively gotten. Teams were smart in not giving in to the Rockies ludicrous demands 1- because they have no credibility and 2- Story hasn’t shown he worth it at all. It’s why not only a deal never happened, but a deal was never remotely close.
So no, I know this is hard for you to swallow, but it was’t me disagreeing with your opinion that made you wrong, there just a lot of evidence that goes against your take (s) and you conveniently try to sweep it under the rug, per usual.
The only reason you believe that my Sox package was “Trash” is because they’re Sox farm hands. Then, me commenting that maybe Sheets is being valued a bit better within the industry than a 40 FV given a 122 wRC+, 7.7% SwStr and 9 K-BB% thru 89 PAs (all while a .211 BABIP) is somehow a crazy homer assertion.
You first make a claim that “no way the Rockies take 3 40s for their best player”, and then now say well “prospect value is completely subjective”.
Like seriously my man, at least make an effort to be consistent in your nonsensical arguments. From what others and myself have witnessed on here, aside from the disgusting arrogance, consistency through your arguments is your biggest issue.
You did a nice job predicting the KB trade as Mr. October pointed out. Now, swallow your pride and admit you were wrong about Kopech, Story, and Kimbrel. I won’t even ask you to go farther in the past for the bevy of questionable-at-best takes you’ve blessed us with on here.
02 Aug 2021 14:35:22
"ou were completely wrong about Michael Kopech, and still are. You doubted his ability to turn his talent into production on the field with a low blow at his mental health"
Except that's not at all what I said about Kopech. I never questioned his ability to perform. I questioned whether another baseball team would want to take on someone with mental health issues, excellent performer or not. If you think it's a low blow to suggest that a guy's admitted mental health issues would make it difficult to be moved, then I honestly don't know what else to tell you. I hire guys regularly. Mental health status is important in hiring and managing employees.
"There are many comparable cases from this past week, all of which having better seasons than Story, that give us a great idea of what would have been on the table for Story. "
This, once again, begs the question. You're moving forward as though teams will automatically see Cesar Hernandez as better than Trevor Story, when that may not be the case at all. Unless you have solid evidence for what was offered for Trevor Story, you can't sit back and say anyone is "wrong". It's that simple.
02 Aug 2021 14:58:54
"Oh yeah well he was never traded so we have no idea what he’s worth. "
If you're going to quote someone, at least TRY to reflect what was actually said. It's hilarious. Here's the quote, since you're obviously too lazy to even bother looking at it with any intellectual honesty. (I'm beginning to wonder if that first word is even possible for you)
"Well, considering he's still on the Chicago White Sox, I'm not sure what your angle is here. He didn't get traded. And as far as I saw, his name never got brought up in trade discussions. "
The ONLY one I can still find is some bad, non-reputable rumor that the Rangers were asking for Michael Kopech in return for Joey Gallo. I also wouldn't be surprised if Bob Nightengale made some tweet about a Kopech rumor. But I saw no actual, legitimate rumors where teams were targeting Kopech.
You're literally trying to prove that I'm wrong because of the "rumor mill". The same rumor mill that had the Cubs acquiring Joey Bart and LaMonte Wade, Jr (and apparently, the folks at MLB Network even bought into it) .
This is what you've resorted to, Franklin. Confirming your own takes because of RUMORS. You resort to straw man fallacies, begging the question fallacies, ad hominem fallacies, and my favorite tactic: when you present something that is so incredibly and laughably dumb, and it's pointed out, you move on and pretend it never happened.
For example, citing 2022 ZiPS. Interesting how, when I pointed out that Rico Garcia is twice as good as Garrett Crochet in 2022 ZiPS, you became quiet about it. You didn't even bother bringing it up again. No, "hey, yeah, I was wrong about that. " But I know what you'll say: "you don't understand how ZiPS works! " Or "well, that one is wrong! " You just left it there.
Hey, for what it's worth. 2022 ZiPS projections:
Rico Garcia- 0.8 WAR
Michael Kopech- 0.7 WAR
Or do those not count because they don't help your argument now?
Calling your arguments "intellectually dishonest" is unfair. Mostly because it assumes there is even a shroud of intellect behind them.
02 Aug 2021 15:18:08
"you’re a big reason why there isn’t much action on this site, unfortunately. "
You may also recall that my comment also resurrected this forum. It's incredible how much power I apparently have. LOLOLOLOL.
You going here is pure comedy at this point. Just admit it, you can't handle that I was correct here. It's really eating at you. You might try and fight that, but when your response is "yeah, you were right, but here's 3 other times you were wrong" (with no concrete evidence for me being "wrong"), it's clear that this bothering you.
Maybe your turn will come some day (doubtful) . Keep trying. Keep making those trade ideas! Out of a million ideas, SURELY, one of them will be correct.
MrOctober was right about things. Natedog was right about things. Chisox's turn hasn't come yet. Hopefully soon, though!
02 Aug 2021 22:04:09
You didn't resurrect this forum. LOL. My goodness, that ego of yours is unreal. There's this calendar event thingy called that trade deadline that naturally prompts some action on the, I don't know, TRADE RUMOURS FORUM. It's the same date every year!
Your quote about Kopech insinuated that because Kopech wasn't traded at the deadline and there weren't many rumors surrounding his name (Hahn put him off limits immediately, that he wasn't a sought after commodity. Or, that because there wasn't a trade involving him, we don't know EXACTLY his market value, so then me calling him uber-valuable is an "unconfirmed take". This circle of logic just doesn't make sense.
Add 'er to the list!
The problem with your Kopech argument overall is that his supposed "mental health issues" are not talked about anymore because all signs point to him taking care of it. Are you positive that teams are putting that mental health label on him? What, at this point, makes you think that? It's convenient, low-hanging fruit to get away from the fact that you doubted Kopech's ability to put it all together as a human being, and here we are, with those issues seemingly past him and him also being an elite level pitcher.
He's been very good on the field and hasn't been any kind of distraction in the clubhouse. In reality, yeah, he was probably going through some things mentally, but he was also having his first child during c. v. all while going through a divorce so he opted out. Posey opted out as well to be with his new child, is he too a head case? Or are you personally speculating as to why EXACTLY Kopech opted out?
"I questioned whether another baseball team would want to take on someone with mental health issues"
If you think there aren't teams that happily employ good players with far worse "mental health issues" than Michael Kopech, then you are completely naive to the current status of professional sports.
Saying something like he's "unmovable" is really just ignorant. You were wrong about Kopech being a "100% head case" and were also wrong about the Cubs signing Bryant to a long term deal, the latter poor projection having slim to none odds for years now. You were also wrong about Kimbrel, so you're not immune.
There is indisputable evidence that contradicts all three of these takes, so go ahead admit you were wrong here head-master Nate. Or is your ego still too big on this anonymous forum?
One thing you do is create your own arguments by taking things I've said completely out of context. You first acted like I called Darin Ruf a bad baseball player when I literally applauded not only him, but Zaudi for finding him. You went down a pretty dense path of trying to prove to me why he's good (including comparing a stretch of his games to Jose Abreu's for no apparent reason) when I never disputed your on the notion that he's a good, valuable player.
Now you're doing the same thing by insinuating that I view ZiPS projections as gospel when in reality, I only cited ZiPS when lumping it in with all other "projection systems". It can be viewed a piece of the puzzle, but one player isn't more valuable ROS exclusively because of ZiPS. I never once have said that.
I was right about Tepera this year as well as the Sox signing Grandal and Cishek a few season's back, so nice attempt at a jab there bud. And when did you ever talk about Rico Garcia, and even if you did, why would I or anyone else on here care?
"You're moving forward as though teams will automatically see Cesar Hernandez as better than Trevor Story"
Dude, YOU literally just got done preaching to me that Darin Ruf was a better overall baseball player than Jose Abreu due to ONLY his 2021 stats. Are you purposely contradicting yourself here, or before were you not attempting to base your argument in any form of reality?
We can make educated guesses as to what Colorado could have gotten based on what the market dictated last week. This isn't going out on some crazy limb. Colorado *reportedly* wanted Kopech straight up for Story. So when Hahn calls Greg Feasel, or whoever was fielding calls for the Rox last week, and asks why on Earth he would give up one of the best pitching prospects in the game for a guy with a 85 wRC+ and throwing issues when Cesar Hernandez (15% better than Story at the plate) is on the table from an division rival for literally a 35+ SP, Feasel undoubtedly has no good reason and the conversations quickly stall. The was probably the case for Cincy, the Mets, Yankees, etc.
03 Aug 2021 02:19:30
"Posey opted out as well to be with his new child, is he too a head case? "
LOL. Posey adopted two children who both had health issues. He opted out to stay home and take care of his family.
Michael Kopech openly admitted his issues, and his coaches spoke PUBLICLY about his issues. If you were a baseball team, and you knew that the guy's own coaches were concerned about him, would you go out of your way to take a chance on him? No.
Michael Kopech's opting out was through, his own admission, mental health issues. Buster Posey's was not.
Again, none of this makes Kopech a bad person or a bad baseball player, but it's a relevant issue that teams/ employers factor in. This isn't controversial or a "low blow". It's simply how hiring people works. If his mental health makes him unavailable, then I'm not going to give him the value he might actually be.
If you'd like to ignore simple realities to feign some sort of offense, that's your right. But maybe, I don't know, dial it back a notch or two.
03 Aug 2021 02:20:01
"There is indisputable evidence that contradicts all three of these takes, so go ahead admit you were wrong here head-master Nate. Or is your ego still too big on this anonymous forum? "
You first.
03 Aug 2021 02:35:03
"Colorado *reportedly* wanted Kopech straight up for Story. "
Are you really going to try and run with a nonsense rumor coming from Bennett Karoll, a shock jock radio host? Is that really your substantiated "rumor" that makes you correct? I bet you also fell for the fake Jeff Passan account LOL.
"So when Hahn calls Greg Feasel, or whoever was fielding calls for the Rox last week, and asks why on Earth he would give up one of the best pitching prospects in the game for a guy with a 85 wRC+ and throwing issues"
Because Greg Feasel didn't ask for Michael Kopech, like, at all.
But you know, Bennett had his "sources". LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
The guy who has never once, not ever, broken a single bit of information about baseball transactions suddenly has "sources". And he got you to believe him.
It truly is remarkable.
03 Aug 2021 14:30:59
Hey, Chi Sox, did you see Fangraphs' latest ranking of the prospects traded at the deadline?
Ranked just below the top returns of Kris Bryant (Canario) and Kyle Schwarber, Eric Longenhagen (Ramirez) tucks in a non-prospect in a non-trade: Tthe Compensation Pick for the Rockies. He calls it a 45/ 40+ FV possibility, and he ranks it quite a bit higher than the returns for the "superior" Cesar Hernandez and Eduardo Escobar.
By not taking a package of 3 lousy 40 FV prospects, the Rockies get a 1st Round draft pick. As I made it known to you, the Rockies weren't taking that awful of a package for Trevor Story. They simply weren't going to, and despite you trying to prove me wrong ("well, the SHOULD have"), it turns out, YET AGAIN, I was correct.
Once again, I ask, how are you so bad at this?
04 Aug 2021 02:42:51
Numerous times you’ve told me that just because something is on FanGraphs, it doesn’t make it factual. You have also said multiple times this month that one site’s FV rankings are not the end all be all. Again, I’m paraphrasing things YOU said. So you trying to claim “victory” here, while very per usual, is wildly hypocritical.
Reading isn’t up your alley — we’ve established that, but now math is hitting you hard too. The valuation numbers that YOU brought to the surface equate a 45 FV hitter to 3 40s. And this is IF Sheets, Thompson and Ramos are all still 40s and IF a 45 slides to the Rockies. Best case scenario for the Rockies, the packages are equal.
I’d personally take the “quantity over the quality”, but as you argue, the Rockies clearly know what they’re doing. Could you imagine if Story sustained a serious injury or underperformed ROS to the point where no team was willing to commit 3+ years?
Apparently anything you have previously said goes completely out of the window from post to post. It’s exhausting and why most of your discourse on here doesn’t make a lick of sense given any kind of relevant context.
04 Aug 2021 13:35:57
" Could you imagine if Story sustained a serious injury or underperformed ROS to the point where no team was willing to commit 3+ years? "
Right. Catastrophic injuries happen. And if ANYONE should understand what it's like to not to plan for catastrophic injuries, it should be a White Sox fan.
The Rockies could trade Story and he could hit 195 wRC+ ROS and all they get is 3 who-dat baseball players. Or, all three of them could be massive and colossal failures (you seem to be an expert in that arena) .
There's risk management that occurs, and the Rockies must feel confident that Story will both get a 50M contract AND that a 45 FV prospect will fall to them late. Is it the best strategy? Probably not.
Not once have I "defended" this strategy. I've simply said that it's obviously what they are trying for. I mean, if you can't comprehend that the Rockies clearly favor the comp pick over the offers they were given, then you should probably go watch Nickelodeon, because this isn't your thing.
04 Aug 2021 13:51:56
Also, quit trying to make the Trevor Story trade a "victory" for you. It wasn't. At all.
You literally took a trade prediction, and when I called you out because it didn't happen, you tried to act like I was wrong.
Your justification? "It should have happened".
Well poke me in the rear and call me Richard! If the only thing it takes to be right on this site is, "well, the team SHOULD have taken the deal! " then no one will ever be wrong on here. Ever. And you can do victory laps until your little legs fall off, Edith.
Trevor Story was not traded for the return you predicted. Perhaps the White Sox didn't even offer it. Maybe they did. He wasn't even traded to the White Sox for ANY return. That's beside the point.
I told you that the White Sox could not acquire Trevor Story for that package. You kept trying to call it wrong.
Again, my stance: The White Sox would not acquire Trevor Story, at least not for that lousy package.
Your stance: it was perfectly enough to get Trevor Story and the White Sox were TOTALLY getting Story!
Look back at just the facts. Only those things. Not "what you think they should have done" or other subjective issues. Just the fact that Trevor Story was not acquired for Gavin Sheets-the-Bed, Bryan Ramos, and Matthew Thompson.
So who was wrong? If you still think it was me then it's clear that you're the one who needs to drop the arrogance.
The pettiness and jealousy has gone on long enough for you. It's really not a good look, Francine.
04 Aug 2021 14:41:07
My point was that package should have been enough to acquire Story, yes. If their best case scenario now is to get a 45 FV hitter to fall to them at the end of the first round, then that player is of equal prospect value to the package I was offering from the White Sox. Have we not established that?
So what do we know?
1. We know that Story was a somewhat sought after commodity from teams like Cincinnati, the Yankees, and then some other landing spots were he could move over to 2B like the Mets and White Sox. However, his list of suitors, especially given his down year, wasn't massive.
2. We know that other rental 2Bman like Eduardo Escobar, Cesar Hernandez and even Josh Harrison were traded at the deadline for much lesser returns than the one I offered for Story. So, we have a relative market value established.
3. We have a pretty good idea that a Story deal never really got close given no storing rumors at at point in the deadline process. We have rumors of Colorado asking for huge returns that would frankly cause other GMs to hang up the phone or are frankly unbelievable.
If I can speculate, IMO the Rockies always wanted to trade Story. In the weeks heading up to the deadline, they tried to improve their leverage by publicly making it seem like keeping him and getting the comp pick was absolutely fine with them figuring teams would call them pretty frequently anyway with Story being one of, if not the best middle INF option on the market in their opinion.
When they asked for the moon in early talks, teams obviously balked because it became clear that the Cubs would trade Baez too and the market slowly started to include guys like Escobar, Hernandez, Frazier, Schoop, Harrison, heck even Trea Turner apparently, etc., all of which having better 2021s than Story.
Then suitor after suitor goes with other options for pennies on what Colorado wanted for less production to date, then they likely tried to reengage with some teams to little interest or elss than what they originally offered, and then the deadline passes and their GM quickly and somewhat oddly brings up the comp pick again publicly. Hey Feasel, didn't you already say you were fine with the comp pick? Knowing that this decision (or IMO, overplaying his hand in marketing Story) would look pretty bad to the baseball community, he quickly had to remember and reiterate that they're "perfectly fine" with how things played out, but I don't believe that.
When's the last time that right after the deadline, a GM mentions a comp pick for an un-traded player? If it's a foregone conclusion that a player will leave your org in FA, a good player at that, then the rational person says "Ok, trade him. "
So, again, Sheets, Thompson and Ramos was probably never on the table. Maybe early, but certainly not last week. If it was and the Rockies balked at it, then fine. They either over played their hand as I'm speculating, OR they were truly never intending on trading Story, to which I and and pretty much all other baseball analysts raise an eyebrow to.
But the market dictated that my package would have been a pretty solid return for Story. Teams knew they had to get close to or beat the potential comp pick's value in these talks, and that's exactly what my package did given the information that YOU brought into the discussion.
I would think as org, walking away with three players, one of which major league-ready, for you best player in Story is not only a better option for a team entering a (probably long) rebuild, but it's also a much better selling point to fans that you're ultimately trying to appease.
That's about all I'll say on the Story bit because in the end it doesn't even matter much. And i'm really not as concerned with tallying victories on here as you are.
I don't think there's any kind of prize on here, Nate.
04 Aug 2021 14:48:25
"That's about all I'll say on the Story bit because in the end it doesn't even matter much. And i'm really not as concerned with tallying victories on here as you are.
LOLOLOLOLOL.
Hey, you were wrong about this. and this. and this. and this. And I was right about this. and this. and this.
But, yeah, I'm TOTALLY not tallying victories on here!
04 Aug 2021 14:56:43
"When's the last time that right after the deadline, a GM mentions a comp pick for an un-traded player? If it's a foregone conclusion that a player will leave your org in FA, a good player at that, then the rational person says "Ok, trade him. "
Literally Farhan Zaidi when he refused to trade Madison Bumgarner or Will Smith in 2019. He faced huge criticism for it. And his response was that they couldn't find a trade they liked that a) helped their team in the immediate season and b) was better than what he felt he could get in the draft as a compensation pick.
"I would think as org, walking away with three players, one of which major league-ready"
I actually probably agree that the Rockies should have traded Trevor Story. Even if your lousy, terrible, hilarious return was all they got, they should have. But they didn't. Because either a) it was offered or b) it was offered, but the Rockies felt it was a joke. Once again, you can speculate. Speculate to your hearts content.
But when you arrogantly chalk up your SPECULATION as someone else being *wrong*, then it's further evidence that you're desperate here and that you are trying to chalk up victories.
And if you're not trying to chalk up victories, you sure do go to some wild, WILD lengths to prove yourself correct. You'll even say that the White Sox "resurrected" Cliff Politte's career just to try and prove that Don Cooper was the Second-coming of the Messiah. That one was so comically bad that it's seared into my memory.
04 Aug 2021 15:10:39
"My point was that package should have been enough to acquire Story, yes. "
And my point was, it should not have been enough for the Rockies.
"Should" isn't a fact. It's not confirmed. So when you say things like, "This is blatantly false once again (*my goodness*) ", over something that is subjective. Who on earth cares what the Indians traded to get Cesar Hernandez?
If we're basing it on "prospect rankings", the Padres gave up a higher rated prospect (Espinoza) to get Jake Marisnick than they did to get Adam Frazier. Heck, they have up a higher rated prospect to get Marisnick than the White Sox did to get Cesar Hernandez.
So for all the "speculating" you choose to do, and for all that you seem to "know", what we saw play out during the trade deadline didn't exactly fit into all of it.
You're acting so arrogant saying you know something to be true that, quite frankly, you're merely guessing. That's it. That's my point.
You're literally on a website, telling someone that they are wrong, with ZERO CONCRETE EVIDENCE as to why they are wrong. It's super pathetic. But it's also completely par for the course for you.
And trust me, everyone, and I really mean EVERYONE on this site, both now or in the past, knows that you're not vying for any prizes here. Your hilariously ludicrous White Sox takes are enough to confirm that you're not interested in living in reality.
04 Aug 2021 15:17:52
Further proof that you move on and pretend like you never said something when it's proven false: You haven't once addressed why you tried to pass of some "rumor" from Bennett Karoll on here and proceed as if it was true.
Honest question: do you believe that a report from Bennett Karoll was true?
Because if you do, then you've revealed all that anyone needs to know: you'll accept and present anything to defend your argument, regardless if it has a shroud of truth behind it.
05 Aug 2021 02:03:57
Bennett has had accurate "scoops" in the past. Given how the Rockies are ran, I wouldn't be shocked if they tried to at one point throw Michael Kopech's name into discussions.
I literally laid out concrete evidence for you in a nicely formatted numbered list. If you go back and slowly re-read, my only speculation in that entire last post was the bit about Colorado's real intention to trade Story vs. what they tried to portray in the media. I know this is like the third time I'm saying this, but your lack of reading comprehension is a big deal on here because a good chunk of your replies don't have a lot to do with what I previously said.
If you're in agreement that the Rockies should have traded Story, then I'm not calling you wrong. If your argument is that the Rockies should have NOT traded Story BECAUSE they can just recoup a comp pick that is BEST CASE SCENARIO a 45 FV, then I'll call you out because my package was equal in prospect value based on values that you first referenced. Equating or slightly beating the comp pick's value should have been every team's intention when going after Story.
It's funny because what you are doing by saying that Bennett's scoop didn't have a shroud of truth behind it is SPECULATING, lol. Unless, of course, you work in the front office of either Chicago or Colorado.