MLB talk 3


Use our rumors form to send us mlb trade rumors.

(single word yields best result)

If you didn't know, we have a NBA trade rumors site and a NFL trade rumors site

15 Oct 2017 21:00:29
If any who do you guys think the Royals can resign?

Agree1 Disagree1

17 Oct 2017 01:43:00
Escobar and Vargas.

31 Oct 2017 04:02:05
Yeah that would probably be my guess too.

14 Oct 2017 04:30:49
Chicago White Sox 2019 Opening Day

Tim Anderson SS
Yoan Moncada 2B
Manny Machado 3B
Jose Abreu 1B
Eloy Jimenez LF
Avisail Garcia RF
Zack Collins C
Adam Jones CF
Nicky Delmonico DH

Noah Syndergaard
Michael Kopech
Alec Hansen
Lucas Giolito
Carlos Rodon

Noah Syndergaard Trade (2018 Offseason):
Headlined by Luis Robert, Dylan Cease, Spencer Adams

Agree4 Disagree5

17 Oct 2017 01:43:53
That Syndergaard trade is a joke.

18 Oct 2017 15:11:55
Why @thestatbook? I think by the end of next year, the Mets could be looking at a big rebuild. Robert will probably be a top 10 prospect by the end of next season. Maybe 3 top 100s is needed. What part about it is a joke?

18 Oct 2017 16:57:59
I can see you are delusional. Mets aren't trading Synderggard, and that wouldn't be enough for him.

18 Oct 2017 19:58:29
Syndergaard has barely 2 full seasons of MLB service time. He's still got 4 more years, and by next season, it's still 3 full years.

It's going to take at least 3 of Chicago's top 5 prospects to even get the Mets to consider a trade. The price tag would completely negate all the White Sox had done in their rebuild.

No one is getting Syndergaard for that cheap. The price tag you suggested, you're talking someone like Dan Straily, not a top 10 starter.

18 Oct 2017 20:29:54
By the end of next season, Robert and Rutherford will be top 5 and Adams will be top 10. Maybe it takes Robert, Rutherford, and Burger to get him. 2 top 25 players and a top 100. Nothing is negated either, look at the lineup. Plus a top 4 pick in June.

I think you guys know your baseball, but you're struggling in your valuation of prospects. Dan Straily for a guy that is ALREADY a top 25 prospect, at 19 years old?

All i'm saying is that when the Mets finish 5th in the east and have a weak farm, they're going to look at a rebuild.

19 Oct 2017 01:56:00
1. You have literally zero clue where guys will be ranked by the end of next year. None. This is pure homerism and blind belief. Those guys are very good, but let's calm down. Guys will get hurt. Some will tank. Players from other teams will rise.

2. No, I'm not struggling on my evaluation. The Marlins were literally asking for 2 top 25 prospects for Dan Straily. The Padres asked the same for Brad Hand, who is a reliever. The Mets will want the moon along with Neptune for Syndergaard.

3. The Mets have an incredibly strong farm system and a solid young core. I laugh at White Sox fans who think they are the pinnacle of strong farms. It was only a few years back their farm was barren. Let's not act like Rick Hahn is this developmental genius. He hasn't accomplished anything other than trading good MLB guys for good MiLB guys.

19 Oct 2017 09:13:35
1. If Chris Sale is tradeable, then so is Syndergaard. MLB has Robert at 22 right now on their prospect list, and I count at least 12 guys who will probably lose their eligibility in 2018. Everyone expects him to tear up A ball, so it's really not crazy to guess he ends up ranked around 7-12 at seasons end. Some writers are questioning if he's going to force the hand of Hahn and force an MLB call-up in 2018 - again 20 years of age. Sale got the #1 overall prospect and, at the time, a top 40 prospect along with 2 upside guys. Sale is also a better pitcher with practically zero injury history.

2. Wonder why Brad Hand is still on the Padres and Straily with Miami? Because they were not that motivated to move them with those crazy valuations.

3. The Mets do not currently have a good system. ZERO top 100s. Yes Rosario and Smith just graduated and look like they'll be pretty good, but outside of them, their system is nowhere near "incredibly strong. " Most credible website/ writers have them as a bottom 5 system.

4. Look at the good teams these days. Most of them have torn it down and are thriving with young talent (Yankees, Cubs, Astros, Royals a couple years ago) . The Cubs motivated a shift for the Sox, wouldn't be surprised if the Yanks do the same for the Mets. Philly, ATL, Washington, all set up pretty well for the future too. If the Mets miss out on getting full value for Syndergaard, albeit with health issues history, they'll regret it.
Full value is probably, Top 10 prospect, 2 top 100 prospects, upside flyer.

5. Uh, Hahn has done a pretty good job with Sale, Anderson, Quintana, Kahnle, Nate Jones, Rodon among some others. Saying he hasn't developed anyone is not true.

6. Lastly, This was merely a suggestion of the kind of player I see the WSox going after in a year when they have multiple long jams of prospects and an owner motivated to spend in a potentially legendary free agent market. This combined with how I see the next year or 2 going in Queens.

19 Oct 2017 15:26:51
Let's consider some facts here.

1. Syndergaard will only cost a team ~$5-10 in arbitration next year. The three starters even remotely comparable in FA will be Kershaw, Keuchel and Price. All of them will earn significantly more than that. The Mets know this. They know that losing Syndergaard means they have to either blow it up, or spend 4x more for a comparable pitcher.

They also know that similar circumstances are also true for other teams: it's trade for a cheap #1 starter, or break the bank for one. They will most certainly capitalize on that and take a team for all they have. I bet you at least two, maybe three of the starters on that your list would go, as well as two top 50 prospects. Syndergaard will be 26 next off-season, with just over 3 seasons of service time. That will come at a massive, massive premium.

2. The reason Hand and Straily are still on their team is because, believe it or not, teams DON'T have to trade their players. They can, and in many cases, do hold out for what they want. No one gave the Marlins that package for Straily, not because he wasn't good, but because it wouldn't be worth it to undermine all the work they've done in building a farm system to acquire them. Heck, look at what it took to get Straily from Cincinnati to Miami. Luis Castillo was brilliant and looks like he could be a #1 pitcher. That was for Dan Straily. The Padres are in the same boat with Brad Hand. They are waiting, because they know what teams will give for top relievers.

3. Speaking of relievers, look at what relievers are getting nowadays, and tell me that your package for Syndergaard is good. Gleyber Torres (who is now #1 overall) and Clint Frazier were both ranked higher than Robert. (By the way, Brad Hand had just as good a year as both Chapman and Miller had in 2016). The Red Sox gave up Margot/ Guerra (#25 and #76 at the time) plus Carlos Asuaje, who was a popular, under-the-radar prospect.

These are for relievers. You're suggesting the White Sox give up a similar package for Noah Syndergaard as the Red Sox gave for Kimbrel, with just one added top 100 prospect? You think they can give him up without adding in Jimenez or Kopech? This is delusion at it's highest level.

4. Stop comparing this to the Sale trade. Sale was older, and had 4 more years of service time at the time of the trade. He also was traded for the #1 prospect in all of baseball, the current #9 prospect, plus some very, very, very good spare parts.

Syndergaard is younger and has 1000 less innings pitched than Sale. A THOUSAND! You think about how much teams value low inning pitchers: Jeff Samardzija got $90MM because he was an innings eater with few innings under his belt at 31.

If we see the old Syndergaard again in 2018, I'm telling you, there's not a snowball's chance in hell the Mets trade him for anything less than Moncada, Jimenez, and Kopech. And rightly so. The trade you suggested, if the Mets put Syndergaard on the block, would be topped by 4-5 other teams, easily.

19 Oct 2017 17:14:57
"Moncada Jimenez and Kopech", all 3, and I'm delusional? Learn a little about prospect valuation and read up on Luis Robert. He has as much upside as any propect on any team. These guys that have torn up the Cuban league have done fairly well in past years coming over.

Syndergaard made like 5 starts this year. Sale is simply better, 1000 innings more or not, Sale didn't miss the whole year with "bicep soreness". Also "looking at the facts", look at Sale's salary and tell me if that made him more vaulauble.

Don't compare my packeage to the package for relievers. Those trades, Chapman or Miller for example, were trades to World Series contending teams desperate for bullpen help and breaking 80+ year droughts. Also don't act like those top relievers aren't ultra-valuable. They rightfully get those top prospects because of what they mean in a 7 game series.

If Syndergaard has a Cy Young Season and like a sub-2.00 ERA this year, then yes ok, maybe the Mets get crazy and ask for someone like Moncada, Jimenez or Kopech. And again, a year from now, Robert could wind up in the top 10. Kopech Moncada and Jimenez will all be on the majors in August. They won't even be "prospects" next offseason. Even with them off the prospect lists, they probably still have at least 2 top 25 prospects with Robert, a top 4 2018 pick, and maybe even guys like Hansen or Rutherford who no one would be suprised if they made a jump up. If Syndergaard is available and healthy, no one has the farm to outbid the Sox. Frankly, there are like 4 or 5 systems that even have the capability to trade for a guy like Syndergaard.

The Mets would be dumb to waste Syndergaard's prime years while they sit in the cellar and watch the Yankees win. No one can give them more then the White Sox.

19 Oct 2017 23:48:51
This really was special. So much to break down.

"Moncada Jimenez and Kopech", all 3, and I'm delusional? Learn a little about prospect valuation and read up on Luis Robert. He has as much upside as any propect on any team. These guys that have torn up the Cuban league have done fairly well in past years coming over. "

Yes, you're still delusional. You literally think Syndergaard could be had for a package sans MLB-ready guys? You have to be out of your mind. He's been a 10 WAR player in just over 2 seasons, and doesn't turn 26 until August. He has 364 innings under his belt. He's also crazy cheap and controlled for 3 more years after this one. If there's anyone who doesn't understand value, it's you. You don't understand how insanely valuable that contract is.

If it makes you feel better, let's say Moncada, Kopech, and Robert. Better for you? Anything short of that is a pure joke.

"Don't compare my packeage to the package for relievers. Those trades, Chapman or Miller for example, were trades to World Series contending teams desperate for bullpen help and breaking 80+ year droughts. "

Kimbrel was traded in the offseason. It's why I also threw his trade in the mix. The Kimbrel trade is only slightly less than what you're suggesting the Mets would get for Syndergaard. Heck, this is a worse trade than the Cubs gave for Quintana, who's a worse pitcher.

"And again, a year from now, Robert could wind up in the top 10. Kopech Moncada and Jimenez will all be on the majors in August. They won't even be "prospects" next offseason. Even with them off the prospect lists, they probably still have at least 2 top 25 prospects with Robert, a top 4 2018 pick, and maybe even guys like Hansen or Rutherford who no one would be suprised if they made a jump up. "

One, you're projecting. This is a pure biased projection with no base other than you're a White Sox fan. So stop.

Two, I don't care if Kopech is a prospect or not. He or Moncada or Jimenez (at least one, probably 2) will be included into the trade. Even more so, really, if they reach the majors in 2018.

"If Syndergaard is available and healthy, no one has the farm to outbid the Sox. Frankly, there are like 4 or 5 systems that even have the capability to trade for a guy like Syndergaard. "

Yankees, Dodgers, Braves, Brewers, Padres, Cubs, Phillies, even the Nationals have the young players to build a trade around. All of them would put a stronger package than what you've suggested.

Seriously, it'll take a massive—MASSIVE—overpay to land Syndergaard. In a year which your only better options would be significantly older and 30-40MM more expensive a year, it would be a feeding frenzy. That package would be quickly outbid by multiple teams.

19 Oct 2017 23:50:43
One last one:

"No one can give them more then the White Sox. "

You may be right. And yet you found a laughably pathetic group to move for an undeniably amazing pitcher.

Please, quit telling anyone we don't understand how this works. Yours is nothing but misguided homerism.

20 Oct 2017 01:58:05
Either way, I'm done. Have fun with your delusions of grandeur. If nothing else, you gave everyone a real great laugh.

20 Oct 2017 06:18:46
Now bear with me statbook, I'm going to make a slight projection right here. Try to stay with me because I know this isn't exactly allowed.

Robert, Cease, Burger, Spencer Adams, and Basabe gets it done next offseason.

A top 10, top 75, top 100, A guy pushing for top 100 plus a flyer for Noah Syndergaard who makes 22 starts, 3.00 ERA for a 72-90 Mets squad that finishes 5th in the East, watching the Phillies and Braves make huge strides with young talent - sharing a city with a team with millions to spend, a great young core and strong remaining farm.

A key thing for you to work on and to remember in these negotiations, is it's more than just WAR and other stats. You have to look at everything happening within an organization. The rebuild, especially in big markets, is the new way to go.

Mets currently = Bad team, bad farm, no coach, a couple talented assets.

Lastly, If you could give me some potential offers for Syndergaard that not only teams could do, but would be willing to do that would "quickly outbid" my offers, I'd love to read them.

20 Oct 2017 07:01:22
Man, you sound like a Mets fan. Or not, really wondering if you support an MLB franchise.

What theStatbook has taught us:

1. Reasonable projection on this site is strictly prohibited.
2. When valuing a pitcher, who cares about past injuries!?!?
3. The Mets have "an exceptional farm system"
4. Better pitcher with no injury history on great contract is not as valuable as worse pitcher, injury history, also great contract.
5. Sale= #1, top 40 prospect, 2 flyers. Syndergaard= 3 tops 10s OVERALL "as a start"
6. The Cubs and Nationals suddenly have prospects to trade for Noah Syndergaard.
7. Who cares about where your team is at with an awful farm? If you have a valuable asset, just hold him through his prime while you sit in last and the rest of the division thrives.
8. Relievers don't warrant trade value in this sport.
9. When you have no more faulty claims to spill, just use "homerism" as your go-to.

20 Oct 2017 15:20:22
As far as deals that would outbid yours, here's a few:

Dodgers: Buehler, Verdugo, and Alvarez.

Nationals: Robles, Taylor, Fedde, and Kieboom.

Yankees: Torres, Adams, Florial

Braves: Acuna, Wright, Gohara

Indians: Mejia, McKenzie, Bradley

Rockies: Rodgers, Pint, McMahon

Brewers: Villar, Woodruff, Ortiz, Ray

Phillies: Moniak, Sanchez, Kingery

Cardinals: Reyes, Kelly, Flaherty

Reds: Senzel, Greene, Mahle

I could keep going. Point is, every one of those has someone either higher on the current prospect chart, or a young MLB talent (or both) . All of those offers would be considered long before yours.

If the White Sox included even ONE of Moncada/ Kopech/ Jimenez, then it gets tougher. If they offer two, I'm not entirely sure anyone can beat it.

20 Oct 2017 23:07:45
So first of all, The Brewers deal is bad, so is the Nats deal for the Mets. The Mets would like all the rest. Problem is, Yankees aren't trading Torres, especially with Florial and Adams. Reds trading Senzel AND Greene?, HA! Rockies aren't trading Rodgers Pint and McMahon for Syndergaard to pitch at Coors. Braves are not trading Acuña and the Mets don't trade him within the division-- same for Phillies and Mets don't let Moniak be the center piece for him, he's been very underwhelming so far. Cards trade is Pretty good, Indians and Dodgers trades are ok.

With all those trades, say teams get in a bidding war. Which team do you think has the guys to add to a deal to ultimately finish it off? Who has more than the Sox can offer?

21 Oct 2017 00:09:56
So, you think that if the Mets came knocking and offered up Syndergaard, they wouldn't ask for at least one (most likely two) of Moncada, Kopech, Jimenez, or Robert (threw that one in, just for you)? You honestly think that?

Your proposal is literally no different than any one we've seen the delusional Yankees fans propose on this site: a bunch of our middle prospects for elite players. It's only slightly better because you've included Luis Robert.

What you have to remember is that not all players on a line. Syndergaard's contract HAS to be considered. His age HAS to be considered. The fact he's thrown only 364 innings HAS to be considered.

Don't think teams value cheap, controllable players? Teams are asking the moon for guys like that. Because in 2018, getting Syndergaard, at a 5-7MM salary frees up space to also get Machado (as you've also proposed the Sox doing, which I'm fine with) . It means they don't have to spend $200+MM to get that value. If Sale and Syndergaard both went on the market today, they'd command well over $200MM each. You can have Syndergaard for around $30MM over the next 4 seasons. That's nuts. The Mets know this and will capitalize on it.
Don't think teams value age? Jason Heyward got $184MM because he entered FA at 26.
Don't think they value innings? Jeff Samardzija got $90M because he had less than 1000 IP going into his age 31 season. The Giants knew that his ERA wouldn't be great, but they could run him out there for 7 innings a night.

Syndergaard is a combination of all three things teams value.

And I don't agree with your point about the Mets' situation. And quite frankly, as a White Sox fan, you should realize how incredibly stupid your comment sounds. Because the White Sox held on to Sale when they were terrible with no farm system. They were facing cross town rivals who were getting very good, and a division where the Twins and Indians look to be better than them for some time.

And even during all that, they held on to Eaton. They held on to Quintana, and Robertson, and Frazier. If there's a team that showed us how to hold out for the best offer they can get for a player, it was the White Sox. Now, they have fans saying how dumb it is to hold on to players in a similar context? Give me a break.

21 Oct 2017 00:10:30
To answer to your points:

1. I'm asking you to stop for two reasons: 1) you have nothing to suggest he'll be ranked that high other than "I LIKE ROBERT. ROBERT GOOD. " And 2) it's ridiculous to suggest teams care about where Keith Law ranks minor leaguers. That Robert is a top 10 prospect or not is irrelevant when I think the Mets will want even better players yet, prospects or not.

2. It's 2017. Pitchers get Tommy John surgery and deal with injuries all the time. Alex Reyes just had TJ Surgery and scouts almost unanimously see him as one of the best young arms in the game. If Syndergaard were 30+, his injury history may have more bearing. That he's 25 would give any team hope.

3. So I was wrong. Sue me. If we can't make comments because we were wrong once, shut this forum down.

4. No, I'm also looking at Syndergaard's contract. Over the next FOUR seasons, he'll make around $30MM. You can trade for Syndergaard AND sign Bryce Harper in the same offseason, have both for three years, and not break the bank. That a team can have that for that long is insanely valuable. By the time of your proposed trade, Syndergaard will be younger, still cheaper (barring an extension), and have half the innings pitched that Sale had when traded. Teams value all three of those factors, sometimes more than stat output itself.

5. Ask yourself, which is more unreasonable: the White Sox don't give up a single one of their top 3 organizational players for a top 10-15 pitcher (at an insane contract value), OR, they give up all three of them for it? You're suggesting the Mets will move their most valuable commodity for a really cheap package. It won't. Obviously, my suggestion won't either. So even at the risk of exaggerating, my point was: you didn't include a single one of Moncada/ Kopech/ Jimenez for a pitcher like Syndergaard. That's a joke.

6. If your proposal is the best the White Sox will do, the Cubs could offer from their MLB roster, and the Nationals have some really good prospects (the #2 prospect overall, one in MLB's top 40, 3 in top 100, and some strong young MLB-ready guys) . Again, this all assumes teams care about prospect rankings. But the Nationals have some really good players they could give to acquire Syndergaard, as do the Cubs.

7. The White Sox were terrible, had no farm system, and were watching other teams zoom by them (including their rich, in-town rival) . Yet, they waited to move Chris Sale, Jose Quintana, Adam Eaton, Todd Frazier, David Robertson until they received deals they were looking for. YOUR OWN TEAM was a prime example of waiting. The Mets have four years until Syndergaard becomes a free agent. That's in 2022, when he's 30. They can also build around him yet. It's not like that team doesn't have other good players. But they can wait, just as the White Sox waited.

8. I don't know what you read to assume that's what I meant. I've shown they absolutely garner trade value. So if teams will give up massive packages for Craig Kimbrel, how much more should they give for Syndergaard? Your proposal is only slightly more than the Red Sox gave to the Padres for a closer.

9. I call you a homer because you can't be level-headed. Look at your trade suggestions from the past. You said this summer the Nationals would give up Victor Robles for two relievers. Your trade ideas for Quintana.

I find it funny that you think the Nationals would give up Robles for a guy like Robertson, but the White Sox can't give up a top prospect for Syndergaard. Or comparing what you thought was fair for Quintana vs. Syndergaard.

21 Oct 2017 07:10:05
1.) No, not just keith law. It's like everyone that posts propsect rankings. Not even trying to be saracastic, read up on the guy. MLB. com had an article on why he could be the next #1 prospect by next year, along with others. Everyone seems to like him, scouts, analytical guys. The dude is an absolute stud - 5tools.

2.) Good point, but I don't think you can act like that won't hurt his value at all.

3.) It's ok to be wrong, just felt the need to point it out.

4.) Ok, Syndergaard had an arm injury. That's why he only has like 300 innings. Also, Sale is a top 2 or 3 pitcher. Syndergaard is, like you said, 10-15. Don't act like Sale was also not on an insanely valuable contract as well. Teams care about projected output in the duration they will hold the player. Does age matter? Yes, but what they've been able to do in the past is a better testamant to their trade value than their age. Look at what Verlander is doing. Every pitcher is different.

5.) You have to realize that the Sox have one of the best farm systems we've ever seen. Just because Robert isn't a top 3 prospect in their system dosn't mean he can't headline a major deal. Will the Mets ask for Kopech or Jimenez? Certainly, and it will be a quick no from Hahn. Then they'll get a no for Acuña from the Braves, and Torres from the Yankees, Senzel from the Reds. I bet Hahn called Dombrowski and said he wanted Devers too in the Sale trade.

6.) So who headlines the trade for the Cubs? Schwarber? Russell? Baez? No chance. The Nats have Robles but again, he's not going to be traded within the division.

7.) Remember, The White Sox were 24-8 in May of 2016, far from terrible. They choked and then the rebuild started a year ago. Before then, they were contening trying to win a world series. The Cubs won it and then the process started. Sale initiated it, then the longest they waited within the rebuild period was a half a season to trade a valuable guy. In less than 1 year, they traded like 12 guys that held trade value. They didn't really wait more than 8 months to trade anyone. Every year the Mets hold Syndergaard, his value drops bc its one less year the aquiring team could have him. He could also have a more serious arm injury in that time. I expect him to have a nice seaon in 2018 so after that, 3 years of a cheap contract will net them the max return. The team is certainly not going to come close to contending in 2018 even though they have a few nice players.

8.) My point is that don't say my package for a starter is bad bc you can compare the return to that of a previous deal for a relief pitcher. It all depends on the status of a team and what they need the most.

9.) The Sox got Rutherford (a top 40) for Kahnle and Robertson, and look what they are doing for the Yankees as we speak. If the Nats traded for Robertson and Kahnle, they beat the Cubs in the NLDS. Now if they don't win a series next year in the postseason, they are practically screwed bc Harper will leave. Again this is my point from #8, you say "relievers" like they can't be traded for top prospects. Bullpens win championships. I do have bias, as does everyone. It's one of the reasons we post on this site to see what people think. In some respects, Quintana got more than I expected.

21 Oct 2017 16:23:49
You think the Nationals would give up the #2 prospect, who was fast-tracked to the MLB roster because of how good he was for Robertson/ Kahnle, but the White Sox can't give up a top 5 prospect for Syndergaard?

You are a homer. Seriously, just stop. Every time you post about the White Sox, you make yourself look worse, and continue to prove my point.

21 Oct 2017 23:36:07
Let's work on our facts. Robles was brought up more to pinch run in the postseason. In my trade scenarios, the Mets get a top 10 prospect overall, and 2-3 more top 100s. We've established that a package like that can only be matched by 1, maybe 2 other teams.

Again, you have to look at the situation/ recent history of a team. The Nationals were absolutely loaded this year, except in the bullpen they were just ok after they got Madson and Doolittle. If they were 100% all in on winning this year and are 100% all in on giving Harper a blank check and retaining him in 2019, then you trade for the 2 best relievers on the market in Kahnle and Robertson. You want to win but also show Harper you're doing everything you can as the front office to do so. Yeah, Robles probably has to go back to Chicago because their system is pretty bare, but you're getting the best 2 guys available for multiple seasons. Plus I personally and many others believe Soto will end up being the better player for them anyway.

22 Oct 2017 05:18:30
I’m stopping this here and now: if you think Robertson is worth Victor Robles, a unanimous top 5 prospect in baseball, but don’t think Noah Syndergaard is worth a unanimous top 5 guy, you literally are delusional.

This whole thing has been a big joke, and you’ve proven four or five times over you can’t be rational when you think about the White Sox.

Good luck dude.

22 Oct 2017 05:49:42
Not what I said at all, but hey - you haven't really been reading what I've said this whole thread.

It's not just Robertson, it's Robertson and Kahnle. Pretty big difference there. Syndergaard gets a top 5-10 prospect, his name is Luis Robert, who you have shown to know absolutely nothing about. Multiple writers have written as to why he can become the next #1 prospect in baseball. He's a stud. I know, credible writers know, and all the MLB franchises that offered him $20MM in bonuses in July know that. He's going to make one of the biggest jumps of anyone. I'm sorry, it's not just me saying it. There are BA guys asking if he could crack the MLB lineup in 2018.

Your knowledge of prospects lacks to a pretty large extent as well as the type of trades teams make in certain situations, things we've learned through baseball history. It's probably one of the reasons why you have posted once since 2014. You comment on the proposals of others while either not knowing enough to create your own, or too afraid to be critiqued. It's ok, we all have things to learn about the game - some more than others. This hasn't been a joke, you just don't like another knowledgeable person debating you. I applaud your ability to utilize advanced metrics, but when someone has a different take then you, they aren't automatically a homer or dellusional.

You've convinced me that my original proposal was off, but that doesn't mean Robert can't headline it. If Syndergaard has as low of an FIP as he did in 2016, then yes, trading him becomes extremely unlikely. This proposal was the "home run" type of trading for an ace, which I see the Sox looking into before 2019 or 2020.

But good luck to you as well and to what ever team you support but refuse to disclose.

22 Oct 2017 06:48:09
Buddy, take the White Sox glasses off. For five minutes. The reason I keep calling you a homer is that you think your team is in this perfect position- everyone has unbelievable value, every prospect is the absolute best ever, and you will get an overpay for everyone.

Robertson and Kahnle, packaged with Todd Frazier didn’t even draw a guy like Victor Robles. (And please, spare us the “Rutherford is better than Robles” argument) . You weren’t just off, you were laughably off. And even when you were off, you continue to double down.

It was a horrendously bad prediction that showed you think too highly of anyone in a White Sox uniform. Look no further than your post about Garcia. I gave you multiple, multiple arguments, backed with advanced numbers and stats to show you your projection is too high. Yet you can’t buy it? You continue to think that he can hit 30 HR based on nothing other than it was a thought in your brain.

It doesn’t take much thought to see what team I support. But the reason I don’t post much: I don’t care. I don’t spend time thinking of magical trades. I want to analyze team needs, player value, and future performance. I want yo leave my bias at the door and talk from a fresh slate. That’s why I don’t disclose it. It makes me less objective.

Maybe you could do the same.

22 Oct 2017 07:02:03
One last thing, don’t throw jabs like “we all have things to learn about this game” when you don’t even seem to understand how BABIP or regression works.

You’re claiming I don’t know trade value, which is really: “I disagree with your ranking of a prospect”. Cool, you can win a subjective argument. One where both parties can walk away thinking they won.

We disagree on a subjective topic. I apologize if you took offense to being called “delusional. ” I don’t apologize for calling you a homer.

24 Oct 2017 01:27:44
I'm pretty sure you made a new account so someone would agree with you publically. "ilikebaseball"? That is hilarious.

24 Oct 2017 11:09:45
It's funny you point that out, that I overvalue guys on my favorite team. I do. Everyone does. It's how the human brain works. This is true for prospects, but a psychologist that I read applied it to your fantasy football team when making trades. You like the ability/ potential of guys simply because they are on your team. This puts it as an objective, scientific study.

Yes, I'm super excited for the future of the White Sox. They have one of the best farm systems we have ever seen in this league. You guys can take my preference into account when looking at my trades. It's the point of the site. I want to hear from people with mutual interests that have a different pov. But really, aren't they theoretically in one hell of a great position for the future? You never know how it will ultimately turn out, but I don't know how the front office could have done much better. I would say the Braves, Dodgers, and Yankees are the only teams that have the same long-term potential as the Sox. And really from what Rick Hahn has been able to do in these trades, sometimes getting an overpay isn't that crazy.

We can agree to disagree on the Nats and Kahnle/ Robertson situation. I personally think they should've gone ALL in this year. If you believe that Harper is leaving regardless, then yes, hold on to Robles.

"“we all have things to learn about this game” when you don’t even seem to understand how BABIP or regression works. "

This isn't a jab. I wasn't being sarcastic. I know how BABIP works but regression for the statistic isn't always a linear model.

In all seriousness though, I haven't read much into all of your comments. Who do you support? It isn't obvious to me.

25 Oct 2017 03:06:51
So you spent all this time getting upset because someone called you a homer, then you backed up the fact that you ARE a homer, and it's okay, because a psychologist told you so.

You are impossible to argue with, and it's not because you're always right or even always wrong. It's because you shift the goal posts the moment you find out you're wrong.

"I'm not a homer. Quit calling me a homer. You call me a homer because you have no argument. Okay, fine I'm a homer, but so are you! "

And then you accuse me of creating a fake profile to garner "agreement". No. As I stated, that's my friend. I told him of these epic, long-winded arguments, and he came in to troll. You can choose to believe whatever you want (you already do anyway) .

If you've read my posts, and still can't throw up an educated guess as to who I root for, I think you're beyond figuring it out, and I'll just keep it a secret. If you genuinely can't figure it out, I find that hilarious.

As for BABIP, regression from the level Garcia hit at in 2017 is reliably backed up by decades worth of data. No one hits at that level for any sustained period of time, it's almost an objective fact at this point. And statistically, we can peg his regression to be somewhere in between .330 and .350. I've relentlessly been generous and talked as though Garcia falls at .350, but I think a realistic projection is .340. His xBABIP was .335 this year. Is it too absurd to say that his 2017 xBABIP is a good spot for him to regress to?

To understand BABIP, you have to understand regression. You either 1) don't seem to understand how it works, or 2) refuse to accept reality when it comes to a White Sox player's regression. Neither is a good trait.

25 Oct 2017 03:22:37
One final comment:

"a psychologist that I read. This puts it as an objective, scientific study. "

As a science/ math guy, I can't tell you how patently illogical and inane something like this sounds, and stands as an insult to science. Please, for everyone's sake, stop making comments of any caliber. You keep making a fool of yourself.

25 Oct 2017 05:02:39
It doesn't take a math guy to show that regression for BABIP or like 90% of baseball stats is not a linear model. Maybe you're a math guy that stopped around the 6th grade, but if you have ever taken a stats or more specifically a sports analytics class, you'd learn about regression and what variables determine the linearity of a particular statistic. BABIP can't be linear because of the thousands of factors that play into it. I feel like a KEY BABIP factor you ignore is Exit Velo and what it does to the stat.

So your buddy trolls baseball trade rumor forums in his free time? Seems like a REALLY interesting guy!

Just trying to show you that everyone has a little homer in them. Never did I deny my "homerism", it was just a weak, low argument that doesn't carry a lot of weight. You aren't going to convince me (or anyone) of flaws in trades by calling me a homer, bc everyone is a least a little bit biased bc, you know, Science.
I'm not going to write you a book report for you on that article, I was just trying to put one of your commonly used jabs it into some perspective for you. Hopefully the logic behind it at least makes some sense, after all, you are a "Science guy. "

I've enjoyed this debate, it was one of the better ones I've had recently. Since this is like your 3rd or 4th "last comment", not quite sure if it really is.

It's pretty evident Chi Sox takes the W here, folks.

25 Oct 2017 05:10:27
Haha, gifting yourself the W. Brilliant. Absolutely freaking brilliant.

Good luck on those predictions. Don't come crying when Garcia's value tanks next July.

25 Oct 2017 05:26:37
They say life is about its small victories. ;)

25 Oct 2017 05:46:47
Whatever helps you sleep at night, I guess.

05 Oct 2017 20:12:06
Lets talk about the Post season. Who wins each series? My predictions

Red Sox vs Astros - Red Sox in 5

Yankees vs Indians - Indians in 4

Diamondbacks vs Dodgers - Diamondbacks in 5

Cubs vs Nationals - Cubs in 4

Red Sox vs Indians - Indians in 5

Diamondbacks vs Cubs - Diamondbacks in 6

Diamondbacks vs Indians - Indians in 7.

Agree0 Disagree3

06 Oct 2017 14:10:56
I actually like the D'Backs pick. The NL is pretty much wide open.

03 Sep 2017 22:48:15
Hey guys how are you doing today

I will be overlooking the trade deadline deals from July /September

Give the trades a 1/10 rate and who won the deal and will be talking about prospects in the deals as well

Eloy jimenez bryant fleete dylan cease

Agree0 Disagree5

15 Sep 2017 17:48:05
If I understand correctly you're planning on assessing who won each trade and you're starting with the Q deal?

The "winner" of this deal isn't going to be known for at least a few years. Quintana is on a lengthy contract and neither Jimenez nor Cease are likely going to be called up until 2019.

14 Oct 2017 04:32:12
Jimenez will be up July 2018.

02 Aug 2017 14:20:30
End of Season predictions, now that the trade deadline has past

AL East- Red Sox. This is honestly a crap shoot, and I think the Red Sox have the better makeup to win the division.

AL Central- Royals. A series of strong deadline moves propels them past Cleveland to surprise everyone for a division title. One last hoorah before the band gets split up.

Al West- Astros. As if there was any doubt.

AL Wild Cards: Indians & Yankees.

NL East- Nationals. Again, they won it early on.

NL Central- Cubs. Brewers were a cute story, but the Cubs will run away with the division.

NL West- Dodgers. The NL was an easy one.

NL Wild Cards- Brewers & Rockies.

ALWC- Indians over Yankees.
NLWC- Brewers over Rockies.

ALDS #1- Indians over Astros in 5.
ALDS #2- Red Sox over Royals in 3.

NLDS #1- Dodgers over Brewers in 4.
NLDS #2- Nationals over Cubs in 5.

ALCS- Red Sox over Indians in 6.
NLCS- Nationals over Dodgers in 7.

WS- Red Sox over Nationals in 5.

AL MVP- Altuve
AL CY Young- Sale
AL Rookie- Judge

NL MVP- Harper
NL Cy Young- Scherzer
NL Rookie- Bellinger

Agree8 Disagree5

03 Aug 2017 04:32:45
Brewers aren't making the playoffs.

03 Aug 2017 05:09:58
To be honest, the only team I really think I messed up on was Colorado. Not a chance that pitching staff gets it done.

IF they make the playoffs, there's not a chance in hell they win a game.

01 Aug 2017 05:08:30
What was the best non-najor deal of the deadline?

I'm going with Tim Beckham to the Orioles. Having a nice season and is controllable. Orioles got him for almost nothing.

What is your pick?

Agree4 Disagree1

01 Aug 2017 13:14:13
Non as under the radar but I love the Nats picking up Sean Doolittle and Ryan Madson.

Lefties are batting .168 against Doolittle dating back to beginning of 2016. A weapon to use against the: Bellinger, Seager, Pederson, Rizzo, Hayward, Schwarber's of the world.

16 Aug 2017 21:41:25
FWIW, check out Beckham's stats since his trade. Incredible.

31 Jul 2017 17:14:27
Undoubtedly the least productive morning I've had at work since last July 31.

Agree3 Disagree0

11 Jul 2017 17:03:30
Wheres cs16

Agree0 Disagree2

11 Jul 2017 21:46:15
Hey. I am here.

13 Jul 2017 15:51:44
Cubs fan, how did you know of Crazysull since you only started posting here recently?

14 Jul 2017 18:12:35
You know you are a legend on this site when the new guys are asking where you are.

15 Jul 2017 05:14:28
don't kid yourself sull.

15 Jul 2017 06:04:36
I was joking.

06 Jul 2017 15:35:19
With a Verlander trade rumors heating up to the Cubs and the recent call up of Schwarber

Could that possibily be a player the Tigers would look at if they do trade Verlander to CHC. He would be the player i'd go for over Happ and i doubt the Cubs trade Baez or Russell (if we can get Russell, thatll be awesome but i doubt it) so Schwarber is most likely the guy to get

Agree2 Disagree1

08 Jul 2017 15:45:23
The most significant thing the Cubs will give up for Verlander is taking on his contract. Unless the Tigers take on a majority of his contract (which defeats the purpose of trading him), they won't get anyone major.

12 Jun 2017 03:34:44
What would a trade for Judge look like ?

Agree3 Disagree2

12 Jun 2017 05:03:40
I have no idea considering they wouldn't trade him. I really don't think you are a yankees fan.

21 Jun 2017 05:09:39
@Batman, lol.

I really think it depends a lot on what they think of him internally tho. For fun, If management was confident his numbers are a fluke (Which I doubt) they probably try to sell him for a controlable elite arm. Teheran? Cole? Idk. i'm just throwing names. But i'd probably put his value in the pre 2017 Kyle Schwarber tier. Maybe even a notch above.

In reality tho I think I'm with batman on this one. They probably hold onto him. Dude is built like Lebron, makes contact and can actually run bases.

29 Jun 2017 14:59:15
Obviously, we can all, even the poster, acknowledge the Yankees won't trade Judge, but it's certainly a fun thought experiment.

Judge could headline a trade for Trout right now, could he not?

Judge + Rutherford + Severino or something along those lines.


mlb talk

mlb talk 2

mlb talk 4

Log In or Register to post

Remember me

Forgot Pass