Trade Idea - White Sox (Go Big or Go Home)

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

The problem is that this organization has never, ever, ever thought of Nolan Reimold as just a "depth" guy.  He has always, always, always been somehow seen as maybe an answer to something at the major league level and I think if he is at Norfolk, it will still be seen once again as somehow "doing something" about the outfield problem rather than actually solving the outfield problem.  Nope.  I prefer having Almanzar, Terdoslavich and anybody else at Norfolk rather than Nolan Reimold- that era is OVER, for me, anyway.   If Nolan still wants a deal, he can go to Japan...lol.   

So when he started the 2015 season in the minors it was because he wasn't being viewed as depth?

 

 

[tntoriole]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

So when he started the 2015 season in the minors it was because he wasn't being viewed as depth?

 

 

Nope...they were just once again planning to get him up to the big league team because he had an opt out in that contract, if I recall correctly, and he was called up primarily because he was "hot" at Norfolk and was seen as a better option than Steve Pearce was at the time.  He has never been viewed as I understand the term "depth", namely as someone who comes up when there are no other options left due to decimation by injury at the big league level.   The obsession with Nolan is peculiar to the Orioles (Brady and, to a lesser extent, Buck and not so much Dan).   

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

Nope...they were just once again planning to get him up to the big league team because he had an opt out in that contract, if I recall correctly, and he was called up primarily because he was "hot" at Norfolk and was seen as a better option than Steve Pearce was at the time.  He has never been viewed as I understand the term "depth", namely as someone who comes up when there are no other options left due to decimation by injury at the big league level.   The obsession with Nolan is peculiar to the Orioles (Brady and, to a lesser extent, Buck and not so much Dan).   

Sorry but I think your monomania with Reimold is showing through.  In 2014 they released him.  In 2015 they stuck him in the minors to start the season.  That isn't the type of things you do with guys you consider integral parts of your ballclub.  He got 195 PA in 2015 and 227 in 2016, that isn't how you utilize someone you view as being able to solve the outfield problem.

Nolan is a back of the bench guy and that is how the O's have been using him.

 

[tntoriole]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Sorry but I think your monomania with Reimold is showing through.  In 2014 they released him.  In 2015 they stuck him in the minors to start the season.  That isn't the type of things you do with guys you consider integral parts of your ballclub.  He got 195 PA in 2015 and 227 in 2016, that isn't how you utilize someone you view as being able to solve the outfield problem.

Nolan is a back of the bench guy and that is how the O's have been using him.

 

My monomania?   lol.   There are only a hundred guys who could have done exactly the same thing over the last three years.   But with the Os, somehow it is only Nolan who can do this role. And you think this is all just Xs and Os, stats only, just business and nothing at all relative to Nolan and his relationship with the Orioles front office management?   I will be convinced when and if we go one season without signing Nolan Reimold.  

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

My monomania?   lol.   There are only a hundred guys who could have done exactly the same thing over the last three years.   But with the Os, somehow it is only Nolan who can do this role. And you think this is all just Xs and Os, stats only, just business and nothing at all relative to Nolan and his relationship with the Orioles front office management?   I will be convinced when and if we go one season without signing Nolan Reimold.  

Rather obviously it wasn't only him in 2014 when they released him or in 2015 when he started the year in the minors.  Are you telling me that guys like Dariel Alvarez and Henry Urrutia were likely to exceed or even equal Riemold's production?  Or should they have simply been given more of a chance because they were not Riemold?

I seem to remember a LOT of guys getting a shot to win a CO slot in 2015 and failing miserably and some of them cost a great deal more than Riemold did.

 

 

[tntoriole]

Pretty hard to see anybody failing more miserably than Nolan Reimold did in 2016 when a job was literally screaming out to be taken.  He contributed nothing. Absolutely nothing.  If they sign another 33 year old eternal prospect who went 13 for 88 in his last 50 games in 2016 and his name is not Nolan Reimold, then I will be convinced.   Part of our problem in 2016 was having a bench that collectively  was a -1.4 WAR.  From Reimold to Flaherty to Joseph (and even to Rickard after his return) our bench was horrific last year.     No to Nolan.  Period.   If I have to have Flaherty, OK.  But we need to at least get back to 0 WAR from our bench (as that level would have at least gotten us a home wild card game last year). 

[Can_of_corn]

31 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

Pretty hard to see anybody failing more miserably than Nolan Reimold did in 2016 when a job was literally screaming out to be taken.  He contributed nothing. Absolutely nothing.  If they sign another 33 year old eternal prospect who went 13 for 88 in his last 50 games in 2016 and his name is not Nolan Reimold, then I will be convinced.   Part of our problem in 2016 was having a bench that collectively  was a -1.4 WAR.  From Reimold to Flaherty to Joseph (and even to Rickard after his return) our bench was horrific last year.     No to Nolan.  Period.   If I have to have Flaherty, OK.  But we need to at least get back to 0 WAR from our bench (as that level would have at least gotten us a home wild card game last year). 

No one is arguing that he did well last year.  Heck I'm not arguing that he should be back next year.

What I am arguing is the idea that a guy that was released in 2014, signed a minor league deal in 2015 and spent half the year in the minors despite poor play at his position and a guy that got a ML deal for little money after putting up a half a win in 60 games the year prior is somehow being showed gross favoritism by management. 

Furthermore they added corner outfielders at the trade deadline in both 2015 and 2016.  Obviously they were not convinced he was the answer.

I don't see much difference in how they handle Riemold and how they handle Janish.

 

 

 

[tntoriole]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

No one is arguing that he did well last year.  Heck I'm not arguing that he should be back next year.

What I am arguing is the idea that a guy that was released in 2014, signed a minor league deal in 2015 and spent half the year in the minors despite poor play at his position and a guy that got a ML deal for little money after putting up a half a win in 60 games the year prior is somehow being showed gross favoritism by management. 

Furthermore they added corner outfielders at the trade deadline in both 2015 and 2016.  Obviously they were not convinced he was the answer.

I don't see much difference in how they handle Riemold and how they handle Janish.

I can see your points, which are well made.   I still hope we don't bring back Nolan Reimold.   He was not the answer then,  he is not the answer now.  He has never been the answer and never will be the answer.  

 

 

 

[Can_of_corn]

12 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

I can see your points, which are well made.   I still hope we don't bring back Nolan Reimold.   He was not the answer then,  he is not the answer now.  He has never been the answer and never will be the answer.  

Thanks.

 

For the record I think he's done as a major league player and if his familial duties allow he would be well served to try and extend his career in Asia.

[Tryptamine]

5 hours ago, birdwatcher55 said:

You really think Sale gets you 5 top prospects? You might get three and a B level guy. A lot of teams a really reluctant to move those high end guys for a lot of reasons. I think Gausman would get Eaton but I would not do a 1-for-1 under that scenario.

Gausman just put up a 3.0fWAR in 2016 and is under control for 4 more years and in your eyes that's equivalent to a guy who put up 6.0fWAR in 2016 and is under control for 5 more years? You guys are severely underestimating Eaton's value.

[El Gordo]

On ‎11‎/‎26‎/‎2016 at 10:28 AM, birdwatcher55 said:

I don't agree with you. I think this would be a great deal for both sides. We add a legitimate ace and fix two other long term problems. ChiSox get valuable assets they can build around or flip in deadline deals. Machado alone would net them three quality prospects.

Bad deal for both IMO. O's would want a lot of young controllable players for Manny and those are the ones the Sox would want to keep.

[dennis wise]

I feel like the off-season hasn't truly started until a person proposes a lopsided trade in favor of the O's, well done in that regard!

I just can't see the O's landing Sale, the White Sox would much rather trade with a team like the Dodgers, Red Sox, Braves, <insert team with lots of blue chip prospects>

[MDtransplant757]

30 minutes ago, dennis wise said:

I feel like the off-season hasn't truly started until a person proposes a lopsided trade in favor of the O's, well done in that regard!

I just can't see the O's landing Sale, the White Sox would much rather trade with a team like the Dodgers, Red Sox, Braves, <insert team with lots of blue chip prospects>

Yep. Welcome to hot stove OH. My thing is that I'd just keep the guys we have now versus nuke the team chemistry

[markakis8]

Machado is the type of player that you do not need to trade until the last possible second if you cannot resign him. Meaning, you aren't going to get MORE value (at least not enough to make it worth giving up an extra year under control) out of him simply b/c he has an extra year of control or w/e.

I think we'll resign Manny. If we found the money under the cushion to keep CD, we'll find more extra change for Manny. He's a Ripken. Be foolish to let him walk. 

[MDtransplant757]

7 minutes ago, markakis8 said:

Machado is the type of player that you do not need to trade until the last possible second if you cannot resign him. Meaning, you aren't going to get MORE value (at least not enough to make it worth giving up an extra year under control) out of him simply b/c he has an extra year of control or w/e.

I think we'll resign Manny. If we found the money under the cushion to keep CD, we'll find more extra change for Manny. He's a Ripken. Be foolish to let him walk. 

I think we have a very good shot on keeping Machado. It's keeping Tillman and Britton that I wonder about