While we haven’t heard anything recently with the Pittsburgh Pirates and the Chicago White Sox about a possible deal for starting pitcher Jose Quintana, the two sides have been actively talking according to Ken Rosenthal. He mentioned that the Pirates and Houston Astros appear to be the favorites at this point, with the New York Yankees appearing like a longshot.

Phil Rogers, who works for MLB.com and previous worked for the Chicago Tribune, noted yesterday that the White Sox are interested in Austin Meadows as part of the return. He speculates that the Pirates could substitute Josh Bell, but Meadows is a target they have asked for in return.

The Pirates pursuit of Quintana started back in December and has continued on despite the fact they signed Ivan Nova to a three-year deal. Quintana would give the Pirates four starters at the top of their rotation who are all under team control for at least the next three seasons. They have Gerrit Cole and Nova through 2019 and Jameson Taillon has six full seasons remaining. As for Quintana, the 27-year-old lefty has four years left on his deal at a total of $37.85 M. He has thrown at least 200 innings in each of the last four seasons and he has a career 3.71 ERA/3.74 FIP.

You can read a detailed analysis here of what his addition would mean for the Pirates and what it might take to acquire him. If anything else comes up tonight, we will post an update here.

IMPORTANT: You will need to update your password after the switch to the new server in order to log in and comment. Go to the Password Reset Page to change your password.


  1. I don’t care who the Sox want to get this done, this trade needs to happen. A rotation of Cole, Quintana, Nova and Taillon makes them competitive with any team in baseball, and let’s face it, while Meadows is their top prospect, they still have Marte and Polanco for a lot of years and if you move Cutch you plug Bell in RF and call it a day.

    Pitching wins championships, and if the FO is really serious about trying to win, this trade happens.

  2. Does Mitch Keller, Kevin Newman, Will Craig and Trevor Williams get Jose Quintana? I Believe with a Lineup of

    And a Pitching Staff of

    Makes the Bucs a top 3 National League team for the next 3 to 4 years+

  3. The sox would be crazy not to accept the Glasnow Newman Hayes Diaz trade as equally as the bucs would be to offer it. A cy young potential pitcher and a batting champion (ala Freddie Sanchez), a gold glove catcher and super 3B prospect for Quintana who will begin regression in 2 years while the other 4 Buc players will be hitting stride. Don’t do it. Quintana is just not that good. Do Yeudy Garcia, Tucker, Diaz and Hayes and maybe I would consider it.

  4. Seems the choice is either A) go for it this year, get Q and keep Cutch, but give up 6 years each of 3 or 4 prospects or B) keep Bell, Meadows, etc., go with Cole, JT, Nova, Glasnow, Kuhl, Kingham. I choose “B.” Anything can happen in the playoffs and Q can lead us to 95 wins and we still get knocked out early in playoffs. Plan B gives you a solid core, decent ML depth and likely assures another 6+ years of 88-92 +/- wins and make playoffs most years. Maybe a few years you make a deep run, see KC and Cleve. the last 2 years. For those who think the value of top prospects is overrated, did you think the same abiut Cutch, Marte, Polanco, Cole, Taillon?

  5. Tim is off this week so you know if somethings is going
    to happen with this trade, it will be this week!

  6. How about a 3 team trade that greatly reduces the impact on our farm system?

    Pirates get Quintana, Nate Jones and Jay Bruce
    Mets get Cutch and Tony Watson
    White Sox get Tyler Glasnow, Cole Tucker or Will Craig, Dominic Smith, Gavin Cecchini, and Anthony Kay

    Quintana speaks for himself, Nate Jones is controlled with options through 2020, and Bruce is a one year stop gap for Meadows.

    Which team says no?

    • This is a great trade for all teams and if proposed no team says no. But I doubt this will ever come to life as a potential trade.

  7. I wouldn’t mind seeing a three team deal with Cutch returning prospects that could be used as part of a Quintana deal. Would like to keep Glasnow and maybe move Bell, depending on how soon Craig is projected to be ready.

  8. To be fair, no one truly knows what names are being talked about. To this point most of what you read and hear about through news outlets is mostly speculation. However, it is fair to assume that Meadows and/or Glasnow’s names have been talked about, since they are the top 2 prospects that we have. After that, there is a LOT of speculation.
    I have said since word first broke, that my offer would be nothing more than Glasnow, Hayes, Diaz and Hinsz, or someone of that caliber. There are reasons to keep each one of those players that I mention, but they also make a good package and none are irreplaceable. I also think that that offer would likely be the best offer they would receive. If I am the White Sox, I most assuredly start off asking for more, and the Pirates most assuredly offer less, however, this is probably the end point of discussions. Pirates should offer nothing more, and White Sox take nothing less.
    That being said, I do believe that Meadows and Glasnow could be interchangeable, but the rest of the deal would have to change as well, and the overall prospects value with Meadow would need to be less. like Meadows, Diaz, Holmes/Kingham, and Hinsz. Again, with Meadows in the deal, I would offer no more, and would be apprehensive about adding Kingham.
    If you keep Meadows, he is the replacement for McCutchen next year. If you keep Glasnow, he can either be at the back end of the rotation for a couple years, or be an Andrew Miller type out of the bullpen for a couple years.
    If we were to trade Meadows, then I think his replacement could be found next offseason, or at the trade deadline this year(depending on our record) by trading Cole, which will need to be done.
    There is no ideal scenario, as the GM, you need to put the best team together this year, then next offseason, work on putting the best team together for next year. You cannot continually focus on this year, and the next three years all at the same time.
    In closing, go get Quintana if it makes you better this year, which it likely would, and worry about next yearnext offseason.

  9. Quintana is an innings eater and the definition of stability. He did have his best season last year and Chicago is selling high. On the other hand, as some have mentioned below, he is not what you would call an ace. Giving up a package that included a pair of our top ten prospects and 2 lower tier prospects seems like an awful lot. I understand this is the nature of the business, but I worry that we mortgage the future. I’m partial to Bell because we have not had a legitimate first baseman in a long time. I hope he is not in the package. Same with Meadows and Keller.

    • We haven’t had a legitimate Ace as well. Cole has been fine but not someone who will win you a WC single elimination game reliably. Glasnow has that potential and should be worth 2 wins minimum this year if he starts in the burgh. 2018 with Glasnow, Tallion, Cole, Kuhl and Kingham is one hell of a potential rotation. With prospects from trading Cutch then Kang, Newman, Bell, Marte, Meadows, Polanco, Frazier and Cervelli looks very nice.

      • 2015 Gerrit Cole was an ace. That’s not debatable. That he didn’t beat a pitcher on a historic run pitching in front of a team who won 97 games (literally our only sample of him pitching in a wild card game, from which we can form no definitive conclusions) doesn’t change that fact. He posted the 9th highest WAR, the 7th lowest ERA, the 3rd lowest FIP, and the 14th lowest xFIP among qualified pitchers that year. That’s definitively a top-10 pitcher, and he was arguably top-5 if you focus more on his FIP than his IP (which was over 200, just by less than the WAR leaders ahead of him). That’s an ace. The 2015 Pirates had an ace, and they won 98 games.

        2016 Cole wasn’t an ace. 2016 Cole also struggled with injuries all season, so it was probably a poor representation of him as a true talent pitcher. But that doesn’t mean the Pirates haven’t had an ace, because they did in 2015, and that’s not disputable.

          • Than a definite top-10 and likely top-5 pitcher in all of baseball? Is Kershaw the only ace in the league in your opinion?

            • An ace is the best card in your deck. So, Cole would be that card. I guess it is up to you to decide what tier of Ace he is. I know I would happily take 5 more of him. My thought is there are certain pitchers that carry an entire team on their shoulders (Bumgarner, Arrieta, Kershaw) and I see them being those Elite aces. Cole doesn’t quite have that. Even if he did, that doesn’t mean anything in the playoffs (Kershaw lifetime 4.55 ERA in playoffs). That being said…I have to say 2013 was a fun year to watch Lights out Liriano, and Cole come in as a rookie an pitch so well.

            • No – I actually have a few criteria…
              1. An ace does it for more than one year – your data on Cole for 2015 puts him in a group of guys who have had really good single seasons – but did not sustain it.

              Dallas Kuechel actually had a better 2015 and dropped off almost as badly…

              there are a handful of aces who have pitched effectively over multiple seasons.

              Kershaw is #1
              Scherzer is #1a

              Kluber and Sale are 3 and4

              Thor 5
              Fernandez would be six but for the tragedy

              Bumgarner and Arieta ar 6

              Price, Cueto, Verlander and Lester make up 7 thru 11

              Greinke, Strasburg, Kuechel, Porcello & Quintana are the next group – need to put together a 6+ WAR season or two and consistently be above 4. They have ace potential

        • Wasn’t saying he didn’t have a great year in 15. I still wouldn’t consider him an ace though. His other years he hasn’t been that close. From college to his tenure with Pittsburgh he has never been unhittable. His fastball has been flat to elevated. I thought he continued to make progress until last year. He is certainly capable of being a top 10 top 15 pitcher no doubt. I believe Glasnow has the capability to be top 5.

  10. Also, how many pitchers have gone 200+ innings 5+ straight years? Quintana is due for injury. He is cheap based on current starter costs. How much will Glasnow cost this year, next, next and next?

  11. i would prefer to back off the trade. Glasnow, Bell and Meadows will be in Pittsburgh this year and for the next 5+ at low controllable costs. Newman will be 18. Diaz probably comes this year as well. Try to get Tyson Ross or someone to tide us over until Glasnow is ready mid season or earlier. Quintana is no ace.

  12. I would imagine the set up the trade options in tiers, just like some of Tim’s rankings. Meaning, the Sox can choose one from each grouping.
    1. Glasnow or Meadows
    2. If they pick Glasnow, then choose from: Bell, Hayes, Craig, or Newman
    If they pick Meadows, then choose from: Keller, Hayes, Craig, or Newman
    3. 2 of Diaz, Kramer, Holmes, Garcia, or Moroff

    • Bell is in the majors already and is projected for 2+ war i believe. His cost is very controlled. So he is over half way to expected war of Quintana and saves roughly 7+ million in salary. Am i missing something here that Glasnow at under a million that we should ever consider offering 1 of these plus another top prospect?

      • Not really. This is just my guess as to how the PROCESS might go, not necessarily who I think they should/should not include. NH would give them different tiers to pick from, kinda like menu options.

  13. Even with Quintana the Pirates are still not in the class with the Cubs. The Cubs would have to have a very down year and the Pirates would have to be perfect. Keep the prospects so that they remain competitive over the next few years. Kang will probably not play this year and Freese is no Kang. If wishes were real then they would have a chance, so trade away all the prospects to get him. Remember he isn’t Sale and the price to acquire him will be as high or higher then what they got for Sale. Hopefully NH is not as desperate as the fan base.

  14. If Clay Holmes, Yeudy Garcia or Gauge Hinsz, along with Cole Tucker, Eric Wood, and Max Moroff or Adam Frazier doesn’t get it done for Quintana I don’t do the trade. If those same players go for Odorizzi I’d make that trade.

  15. If the pirates intend to keep McCutchen then I am ok dealing Meadows. We would have our OF set for this year and next, even with a declining McCutchen. If it costs Meadows and Glasnow then I don’t think anything else should be added to the deal.

    If we have to deal McCutchen to make it fit in the payroll then it is tough to deal Meadows or Bell, unless we get another hitter coming back.

  16. …..young hitters with big upside is not something we have much of- in the whole organization. Past bell and meadows, we have nothing. Therefore I hope this trade speculation dies.

    • Yes, exactly. Taking into account mlb roster and minors, there is much more pitching depth than hitting. Seems Kingham is almost forgotten, but he was excellent until injury and good at end of 2016. Even Brault and Hutch may be useful, but they are about 7th and 8th SP.

  17. If they don’t get the Quint, do you think the Pirates will be in play for Jason Hammel? I know he’s not a lefty, but would add some quality innings to the rotation.

  18. One of the overlooked aspects of this discussion in trying to figure out between going for it now and getting quintana vs. keeping the prospects and letting them carry the team is the fact the neither cutch or gerrit cole will be around by the time glasnow, bell, meadows, keller and newman have all solidified their spots in the bigs assuming that all goes well and they all reach their potential. Therefore it makes sense to me to spend the prospect capital to get quintana so that there is still a top of the rotation pitcher to pair with taillon while the rest of the prospects who aren’t traded for quintana develop.

    That gives you Cole, Cutch and Quintana to go for it this season and then you can recoup assets next offseason with trades of cutch and cole while still having two studs in the OF (marte, polanco) and two studs in the rotation (quintana, taillon) for several more years and reasonably the same talent level on the farm.

  19. I just want to throw this out there……for those of you saying Newman should be off limits, how many of you were complaining when he was drafted? What has changed since then? He is still basically the same player, slap hitter, good plate discipline, can stick at SS.

    All of that is great, but not anything that should make him off limit in a trade.

  20. I see Quintana as a very strong, solidifying LHP addition to the rotation — a better version of what Wandy was for us years ago. But because he is not a lights out, give-him-the-ball-&-he-will-deliver-you-Game-7 type, it’s really tough to give up probable impact-bats in Meadows or Bell. Glasnow & Keller/Newman/Tucker etc is probably closer to NH’s “uncomfotable” but fair line of thinking

  21. Seems to me the deals done by NH aren’t discussed in media ahead of time. For this reason alone I don’t believe this deal will get done.

    Much more likely Quintana will be dealt at trade deadline. Teams in contention are more motivated to give up a bit more in July when the promise of a championship is within grasp.

    Maybe Pirates will be that team and Cutch will be the “bit more” involved in a 3-way deal?

  22. Pitching wins out over everything else. I saw it here in Houston when they loaded up with Clemens, Pettitte, & Oswalt. Their offense sucked, but they made it to the World Series on pitching alone in 2005….didn’t win though. All that said, I love Bell and really want to see what Meadows can do along with Glasnow. Bottom line, I’m glad I’m not calling the shots.

  23. I wonder if the Pirates offered Kuhl instead of Glasnow if that would interest the White Sox. I hate the thought of giving up Glasnow when he has the chance of being a top of the rotation starter.

  24. I really like Glasnow, but if he’s the centerpiece of the trade we are losing 6 years of him for 4 years of Quintana. All things considered that looks like a good deal. Certainly there is risk: Glasnow could emerge as a top shelf ace easily. But Quintana is already a top pitcher and a proven 200 inning guy. The biggest thing the pitching staff needs is a AJ Burnett type battle horse who can win when things are not going well. Quintana seems to be this guy. But don’t trade Bell, that would really hurt the 2017 Pirates and the team for years to come. Meadows depends on your view of Cutch moving forward. Same with Newman.

  25. One thing that bothers me about peoples’ justification to trade Bell is that he’s “just 2-3WAR due to poor defense.” But the Pirates are the ones who moved him to 1st to fill a need and get his offense to the majors faster. Not that his defense is great in the outfield, but now all of a sudden he’s pegged as destined for DH because he can’t play 1st well enough. Seems like we shot ourselves in the foot there, if the concensus really is that he can’t get back to OF either.

    • That might be true if he was a good defensive OF, and they ruined that by moving him to 1B, but he was a butcher in the OF as well, so moving him to 1B was supposed to help is defensive value

      • OK that’s what I wasn’t sure about. I didn’t recall ever hearing he was below average in the OF, I thought maybe he was at least adequate.

  26. Really don’t see the need for debate. A package centered around Glasnow and Meadows is perfectly fair for this guy. Pirates can push back on how good the next 2 or so players are (which is my completely uneducated guess at what could be happening).

    One thing we are overlooking, is that Q is cheap but this is the Pirates. NH could very easily be including additional assets to get Chicago to eat some of his salary. Wouldn’t surprise me at all if we ended up sweetening the pie just so the White Sox pick up some of his salary.

    • Sweetening the pie for Chicago to eat some of this chump change contract would be idiotic, and would cause a huge uproar.

  27. There may be a way to afford trading Meadows and crazy as it sounds it would be by trading Cutch also. One large Caveat is Cutch must go to the dodgers or Yankees. Only those 2 teams seem to have the right type of prospects that could replace Meadows and Glasnow both very nicely. Allowing Meadows and Glasnow to be used in a deal for Quintana. You would then use a combo of Jaso, Bell, Frazier, and Freese in right and at 3 of 4 at first, until the prospect you get back for cutch is ready.

    • That’s a good point actually. I rather them do that with Bell, though, and keep Meadows, if Glasnow and Bell could somehow get it done.

      • Absolutely Bell should be a good substitute. I hate losing impact bats regardless of which one, but the sting is less if the Pirates can receive an impact bat back for someone like a Jay Hay, Cutch, or Watson/Bastardo deal.

        • thought about this some more- i rather trade the guy we get for Cutch along with Glasnow, and keep both Bell and Meadows since I’m already emotionally attached :). I think Cutch’s yield will be a comparable piece to Bell (MLB top ~30, but not top ~10)

  28. I could see an argument that it would be fair to trade Meadows, Glasnow, and a Pirates’ top twenty prospect. However, I would like to avoid the tier of prospects that is straddling number ten – since 7 through 15 might be pretty even. If we give up Meadows and Glasnow they would probably accept that concession.
    I would view Glasnow and Quintana as flipping 6-years of an uncertain promise for 4-years of way more certainty. As Tim I believe has said, 2 or 3 of the Glasnow years might be watching an inconsistent pitcher learn how to pitch in the majors. So even if Glasnow reaches his “ace” potential it might only be for the last half of his time with the Bucs.
    Meadows is a lot more iffy to me than apparently to others. The hamstring injuries concern me in that they appear to be “chronic” and robbing him of development time and one of his biggest assets – speed. So that could leave him stuck in RF with a good average, an unremarkable arm, and the hope that he develops some power. I’m surprised scouts aren’t lowering expectations for him a bit to say 40-50 range.
    And the back end of the top twenty prospect would be somewhat irrelevant.

    • Name me the last young baseball player who had “chronic” hamstring injuries? You are worried about nothing.

      • I don’t really understand your response. Players with “chronic” soft tissue injuries tend to appear to become less talented because the injuries make them slower, less flexible, drain the power, etc.
        Are you implying this never happens? In my experience, it happens all the time. Some players get labeled injury prone and are forgotten. Sometimes it is one of the things that prevents a player from training as hard and they fail to reach their potential. Sometimes to the fan it appears as if the player just lost speed or power. It is not just young players, it is also the thing that ages players more quickly than they should…

  29. I think the Pirates should stay put. No need to make adittional changes to get to the playoffs. Quintana is a good pitcher but with the workload he has had during the past four years, he could end in the operating room, while all the Pirates ex prospects are having excellent seasons in Chicago.

    No way should the Pirates trade Glasgow or Meadows or Bell.

    • Every player is a risk though. It isn’t like he is Aroldis Chapman and throwing 105+. Glasnow could blow his arm out just as easily. Meadows could tear his ACL. You can’t look at guys and say this guy pitched a lot of innings he may get hurt. Let’s not trade for him.

  30. Time to stop the non sense about trading Glasnow, Bell or Meadows and certainly not 2 of these for Quintana. Glasnow, Bell and Meadows represent 3 of the top prospects in all of baseball, they are top 20 prospects.
    Meadows and Bell are 2 exceptional batters for our future, they cannot be replaced in the next 5 years.
    Glasnow has better minor league stats that Quintana did, he only threw 23 innings in the majors last year, his minor league stats are top rate.
    Time to ride this out and keep 3 future studs.

    • Very important point made.

      If the Pirates had the budget, this wouldn’t be an issue. Trade talent, but more in free agency.

      This team doesn’t have that luxury.

      How awesome would the A’s look right now with Addison Russell and Josh Donaldson on the left side of their infield?

  31. Hope that they do not make the trade to trade away Keller, Meadows, Bell, Newman or Glasnow. As a small market team, we just can’t afford it. Maybe one of them with a package deal. Quintana is good but will he turn us around as a contender against the Cubs and Cards in 2017? We need another year of development of our young guys and go for it in ’18/’19. It is what it is.

    • There’s a potential flaw in that line of thinking – Cutch will almost certainly be gone in ’18, and Cole will almost certainly be gone in ’19. And the greatest likelihood – because, you know, baseball – is that only maybe 2 of the 5 guys you mention above will end up being impact players, and the others will fall somewhere between average-dom and disappointing. So you may be saving up for a big push that never materializes.

      And by the way, I wouldn’t expect the Cubs and Cardinals to suddenly fall back to the pack 2 years from now. The Cubs have their entire offensive core in place through 2019, and if they don’t resign Arrieta and/or Lackey, they’ll pick up at least one of the premier free agent starters.

    • Not afraid of cards their lineup is aging their pitching is a shell of what it was. The everything bad that could happen did pirates of 2016 hung with them the whole year. I’d be surprised if they didn’t pass them next year with the team as is. The emerging NL East teams worry me the most. Definitely agree that all legit scenarios point to 2018 as the year everything will come together.

  32. Hope they don’t make the trade. Anticipated prospects is too high of price and will hurt for years to come

  33. In no way should Austin Meadows get included in this trade or just about any other for that matter. I can see Glasnow, Diaz, Bell plus (maybe) Tucker/Newman but they already have their SS of the future in the bigs.

  34. The thing is if we trade Bell I think we are hurting our 2017 club not to mention the outer years. I would not be surprised if Bell is our best hitter in 2017! That BB/K ratio he had is extremely rare

        • In retrospect, was $5MM too much to pay for a future DH?

          Bell is not a good outfielder and not a good first baseman. From all reports, he has worked at improving his defense at first and deserves credit for all he has done in regards to that.

          Josh Bell can hit and right now it’s basically all he can do. Wish him all the success in the world, but he appears to be one dimensional.

        • 2 years, while making a huge transition to MLB isn’t a lot. If he wasn’t an elite hitting prospect it would be quite different of course. If he hits 300 with 20 plus home runs I can handle a mediocre defense at 1st.

    • Bell is a good prospect for sure but we’ll be at least adequate with Freese and the dred dude. We haven’t had a decent first basement since Willie. What’s a couple of more years? Hey, Pedro is available . . .

  35. Maybe I am overvaluing Bell, Meadows, etc…………..but neither is Quintana in the same league with Chris Sale. Would rather have another bad year than give those type of prospects away for a good, reliable pitcher, but not a great one !!! IMO!

    • Agreed. I would not be opposed to giving perhaps Glasnow in the deal for Quintana, but I would not give more than 1 top 5 prospect, and definitely would prefer it not be Bell or Meadows. Quintana is just not a #1 starter, and 2 top 5 prospects is an overpay for him. The Pirates as a small market team cannot afford to overpay for players like that.

  36. My first thoughts…. NO.

    For one thing, if we trade Meadows,
    the next day our discussion centers
    around where do we find an outfield
    prospect in the next 12 months.
    We have a wealth of nice young pitchers.
    (in fact, maybe one or two too many)
    We have an extra bullpen lefty.

    I think I would trade from surplus

    I do not feel we have a wealth of extra
    prospects to play in the field.

    Just my very uninformed thoughts.

    • Trading from strengths is not uninformed, at all.

      If the Pirates had two or three Meadows like players in the system (position included)…sure, trade one.

      They don’t.

      Pitching? Yes. I think there are a few who can develop into strong starters…and that’s where the Pirates should deal from.

      I was never one of the NH should be burned at the stake for the Liriano trade guys, but this is where it would be nice to have that one back.

      Reese and H. Ram would be nice chips in a deal like this…

      • The discussion appears to be centered on two of our top 4 plus an additional, lower ranked prospect. Reese and HRam are not good enough to be the center pieces and might have been too good to be the throw ins. So I’m not sure they impact this deal in any way

        • I agree…neither is good enough to be a centerpiece.

          But, had the team held them…

          Glasnow, McGuire, H. Ram, Hayes might get the package done.

          Swap out any of the last three for Waddell and I think it’s a trade that happens.

          Let’s not forget, the Jays paid $17M for those two guys.

      • i was tempted to go postal on u – but you are not alone in failing to understand that if you keep the two future hall of fame prospects you keep – and are still paying – Liriano…

        That means you don’t have Nova or Freese.

        the Pirates are in a position to put together a rotation that can be competitive (baring injury) for the next 3 to 5 years.

        having both Nova and Quintana pitching deep into games and 200 innings has makes the bullpen better and the bench deeper (should be able to go with one less bullpen guy)

        That would not be possible with Liriano

      • If we still had Liriano, then we aren’t even talking about trading for Quintana. Liriano just took up too much money.

  37. Anybody else have the feeling this trade is a high stakes game of “chicken”. Both sides want to make a deal but the other side wants a little too much. And each side is waiting for the other to panic first.

  38. The Astros are only being asked for a 20-30 ranked pitcher and 2 50+ guys. Glasnow and bell are 2 top 30s. Glasnow and Meadows are arguably both sub 20s. The pirates have most potential for best package. Shouldn’t have to package the top 20 guys together.

  39. Can’t see the Pirates dealing Meadows which may hold up the deal. Plus I don’t think Chicago needs to deal Quintana right now if they don’t get what they want. Teams may pay more at the deadline

    • No but the reports indicate they want him traded by Spring Training. At least that is what Rosenthal said yesterday.

  40. Glasnow is the only one of the Top 5 id be willing to move. If they wanted Bell then I’d have to get Todd Frazier back in the deal as well. Glasnow Bell Diaz and Holmes for Quintana and Frazier and low level Catching prospect

    • In that case, I think it would be Cutch to yanks for prospects, then those prospects plus Glasnow to CWS for Quintana. What you’re going to get for Cutch isn’t good enough to get Quintana alone.

      • Correct, I think Cutch could yield a MLB top 30 prospect (comparable to Bell), which would be a good second piece to complement Glasnow. That’s the only way they keep both Meadows and Bell in a deal for Quintana IMO.

  41. I’ll admit I’m conflicted. On one hand I’ve complained about the team not going all-in, so to speak. I like Quintana a lot, but the prospect haul it would take may be too rich. After reading about Glasnow getting 3 votes for top SP in MLB, I think we fans are undervaluing him. The most I’d go is Glasnow, Bell and a Holmes-like prospect.

    • Glasnow got votes for being a top PROSPECT…
      He appears to be a long way from being able to go out every fifth day and pitch effectively in MLB…
      Huntington has to balance the risk rewards – if Glasnow gets his act together anytime in the next two years the Bucs will regret including him in a deal for Quintana – but if happens later than that – which is probably ok with the rebuilding White Sox – and is fully consistent with Glasnow being a top prospect.

      the Bucs problem with “he the takes 2-3 years to become the next Randy Johnson scenario” is that means they only get 3-4 years of that because he becomes unaffordable when he reaches free agency

    • Bell’s war last year was negative. I guarantee that will never be the case with Meadows even if he is an average hitter. Years of Travis Ishikawa and Ike Davis didn’t kill the bucs and Freese and Jaso are light years ahead of those guys. There will be plenty of money available to throw at Neil Walker in ’18 and he will be able to field at 1b.

  42. I would hesitate to trade 2 out of Glasnow, Bell, and Meadows. Perhaps something like Glasnow, Holmes, Hanson, and Escobar. Would that be enough?

    • I believe nobody is going to be happy with the prospects sent to the Sox if this trade happens. I am almost to the point that I hope the Bucs back away from this proposed trade, and attempt to sign another veteran free agent pitcher.

      • Not me and here’s why.

        The Cubs.

        If we want to win the division, we’ve got to beat their rotation with our rotation. Simple as that.

        I would not include Meadows, but Glasnow and Bell. yes. Because the Bucs have cover for first base right now that is pretty solid. Either in Freeze or Jayso.

        And think about this. What if they make this deal for Q. And what if they work something out with Cutch that would allow him to retire a Pirate. It would mean Cutch moving off center field – probably to right. And it would require some imaginative financing and probably a deal where Cutch left money on the table. But the team would be so strong going forward with Cutch AND Meadows they could afford to keep all four healthy and not miss a beat. Imagine if your fourth outfielder was Austin Meadows…. Yikes.

        I think it would take pressure off Cutch and he would age like fine wine and eventually there would be a statue of the lifetime Buc somewhere outside PNC Park with the greats.

        “Which way did he go? Which way did he go, George?”

  43. If the Bucs trade Meadows, they need to bundle (Watson or Bastardo) and Harrison and get a top outfield prospect that is, at most, a year away. If I were Huntington, I’d be making those calls to see who might be available. If he can identify a prospect worth Watson/Bastardo and Harrison, then trade Meadows and get Quintana. Meadows, Glasnow, Tucker or Kramer and a throw-in from low in the top 25 list. We get to keep Newman.

    • I didn’t think Watson/Bastardo and Harrison would have anywhere near the value to get a top prospect. None of three are great contracts, especially after 2016. Seems that Pirates would be content to deal Bastardo for minor league depth.

      • what? I am sue the Angels would love to trade Mike trout for that package – Huntington should be fired for not calling them and getting this done!

        seriously – a lot of what gets proposed on this site reminds me of my days of playing fantasy baseball (early 2000s) and i would get trade proposals like “how about Juan Uribe, Joe Randa and greg Zaun for Albert Pujouls?”

    • Do that trade and nobody will be talking about how the Nationals got fleeced and will be saying how the Sox robbed us.

  44. Id be ok with one of bell and meadows. Obviously meadows is cutchs replacement next year while bell is an imnediate and long term solution for 1b. I have no evidence of this, but id say center or left is more important than first. Tough call.

    • I would hate to part with Meadows or Bell. That leaves a huge hole at either OF or 1B when Cutch leaves. If Frazier is not good enough with the glove to start at 2B and if Kangs problems derail his career we have more holes. I much preferred the 3-way where we lose Cutch, Glasnow and another decent prospect, but nit a top 5.

    • If those were the players to complete a deal I would pull the trigger. Newman can be replaced by Tucker or Kramer. I hate to lose Glasnow but you must give up something valuable to make the trade fair to the Sox. I really think Meadows or Bell must be included in the trade to make it happen. That is a very tough call if I was the GM.

          • They already tried that with Nats & was rejected. Cutch doesn’t have that value after down year & trending in wrong direction. If he rebounds this year then he won’t have but 1 year left on his contract which won’t get that type of return.

              • If you’re contending at deadline then you don’t trade Cutch & if your not contending it’s probably because he hasn’t bounced back, thus for not getting you a good return. You don’t trade for Quintana unless your trying to contend. Catch 22. I keep Meadows at all cost.

                • Joe two probably’s don’t make a certainty. I agree with you in both circumstances, but a lot can happen. I am assuming we aren’t contending at the deadline and Cutch is having a decent 2015ish year. If hes not…..it doesn’t really matter. If we can’t get what we want now, It hardly matters if we still can’t get what we want later. I’m not going to cry over 2 mid level prospects we didn’t manage to secure by trading him now vs. later.

      • No Newman. That guy will be our starting SS no later than 2018. Not exactly an easy position to fill with somebody who has a bat. Don’t trade Meadows, Newman, or Keller. Anyone else have at them. If the others don’t work then don’t do it.

            • And in my opinion would certify Neal H. to be admitted to an insane asylum. Quintana has thrown over 200 innings for each of the past four seasons. With the fragility of pitchers in this modern era, there is every strong possibility, if not probability, that he will not be able to keep up that pace. If I am Neal H., first of all, Meadows and Bell are untouchables, in any deal. I will give one of Glasnow, Keller, or Kramer, and one to two lower rated prospects. THAT’S IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I cannot believe that anyone would be in favor of trading Meadows or Bell. Bell in particular has a ceiling on offense that has not been built yet.
              Since we signed Nova, and have Kingham coming back, there is no need to make any deal at all, let alone one that will seriously weaken the farm system if you give up multiple top tier prospects. The cost is just way too high. I would prefer looking at other, less expensive options from other teams. Yes, I’d love to have Quintana in black and gold, but not if the price includes Meadows or Bell.

        • Newman is NOT that good. How much better do you expect newman to be over Mercer year 1? year 2? Better than Tucker? minimal at best. Therefore if another one of your shortstops is ready by then, you can afford to let Newman go- This isn’t anyone special.

          • The only reason Newman is rated ahead of Tucker at this point is because of his bat, nothing else. Sorry, but you can’t just a “bat” at SS, the kid has to be a good defender first and foremost.

            I really don’t get the obsession with Meadows, he’s hardly had any AAA AB’s and he’s the next coming?

      • If we made this trade, then that means we literally would have traded away 2 of the best 5 defensive catchers in the entire MiLB in less than a year. Our third catcher would be Clint Hurdle at this point.

      • Really don’t want to trade Bell. Wouldn’t do a Glasnow and Bell trade. I would be shocked if Neil did that

        • I would. Quintana provides huge value over the next few years especially based on his cost. Sox have to get value to give that up. Bell is the most expendable position player prospect they have.

          • I understand that. However, we are approaching a Sale-like package. Q is a stud but there’s a fine line between being aggressive and over-paying. Prospects are our only route to success

            • I don’t think that’s entirely true. Impact players are the route to success. In the Pirates’ case, due to revenue limits those impact players need to be well below market value, but they don’t necessarily have to be prospects. The Pirates have been competitive for 5 years not only because of Cutch, Cole, Walker and Marte, but also because they received star-level (4+ WAR) performance from players like Cervelli, Martin, Burnett and Liriano at a fraction of their market rate.

              Quintana is a star, and he’s a bargain relative to his performance. He fits right into the mold. More important, he’s ready to deliver 4 WAR NOW, while the Pirates still have Cutch, Marte, Kang and Cole on affordable contracts, and Polanco and Taillon ascending.

              Bell will be challenged to be anything more than a 3-win bat-first player without defensive and base running value. Glasnow may never be as good as Quintana is right now and will be for the next 4 years, or he could take so long to get there that Cole, Cutch and possibly Marte will already be out of town. Prospects are great, and prospects break your heart.

              It’s clear that the market inefficiency for bounceback starting pitchers with mid-rotation upside has closed up. The prices for the next Volquez or Liriano are out of range. If the Pirates are going to get a #3 SP for this season (and beyond), it’s going to come via trade for someone like Quintana – or via a great leap forward from Tyler Glasnow. One of those two is far likelier than the other.

              • Honestly if they Don’t want Glasnow as the main piece- as a GM you just have to move on. This deal can’t be built around anyone else realistically.

              • Good points; many are possible; I still am concerned about the past four years, each seeing Quintana throw 200 innings, and the cost it will take to obtain him. I’m not parting with Bell, despite his defensive shortcomings. I say look to one of the other 28 teams out there and make a deal for a pitcher who can help, but who can be obtained at a more reasonable cost.

                • I think you’ll find there are very few alternatives to Quintana if you want #3 level production or better. The contenders want to hold onto their pitchers, obviously. Even the teams with an excess (Dodgers) are going to unload the expensive and/or back-end arms (Kazmir, McCarthy). And most of the non-contenders are non-contenders because they lack decent pitching in the first place (San Diego, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Minnesota).

                  Archer is the only comparable arm who might be available, and the price to acquire him won’t be much different than Quintana’s. Smyly, Gray and Odorizzi would cost less, but they also have lower upside and/or come with greater risk (Smyly would be my choice among the three). After that you’re in the Pineda range, and frankly at that point you might as well see what Glasnow can do with Searage and Meccage working on him.

                  • You may be correct, and you may not be. We–average fans–don’t know who is available and at what price across the MLB industry. Look, we all know that obtaining Quintana is an enticing possibility. I just don’t want to see our farm system take a huge hit to make that happen when I think that another, very serviceable (perhaps not as much as Quintana), pitcher could be obtained at a far less cost in terms of our farmhands. Even if that pitcher is not as good as Quintana, that pitcher, whoever he turns out to be, could still be enough to, along with Nova, significantly reduce the gap between the Pirates and Cubs.

                    • Who else are you thinking might be available? I went team by team looking for starters with at least a shot at 3 WAR and I couldn’t think of any others who would be expendable and relatively inexpensive. I certainly could have missed someone – anyone in particular you have in mind?

              • which 5 years have we been competitive in again? I understand the 3 that we went wild card in, but the bookend years not soo much….lets not forget, we had almost a 20 game negative turnaround from 2015 – not sure where all these positive thoughts are coming from? we could just as easily finish sub 500 for the next 5 years especially considering our division and the lack of our ownership to go for it….

                • In both 2012 and 2016 the Pirates were within 1-2 games of the WC in September. That’s competitive, late season collapses notwithstanding.

                  There’s a pessimism that’s pretty common on this board, probably among Pirate fans in general. It blinds people from the fact that this is a good team, with stars, depth and a ton of players with upside (Cutch, Polanco, Cervelli, Bell, Cole, Glasnow) relative to what they produced in 2016. I can assure you the rest of the National League thinks the Pirates are contenders.

            • Using prospects to acquire proven talent is a route to success. Especially if it doesn’t hurt team in short or long term. Trading Glasnow and Bell for Quintana fits this profile. Meadows and Newman, not so much.

            • Yes, but isn’t trading prospects for 4 years of a proven major league commodity using them as a route to success? If it is only 2 years of control, I don’t believe we are even having this discussion.

          • There is a better chance we can internally over the next year or two have an options close to Quintana vs. a hitting option close to bell. therefore you can’t really trade bell or meadows.

          • To me, Bell looks like a clone of both Eddie Murray and Reggie Smith. THAT KIND OF PLAYER IS NOT EXPENDABLE, even given his defensive shortcomings, which could improve with time.

            • Eddie Murray and Reggie Smith could actually field a position, Bell can not, which is ludicrous for a player at this stage of his development. Bell is the perfect candidate for DH in the AL, that’s where his value will be and in the case of the Sox, this is a match you take advantage of.

          • So, what is your plan for first base than? Just curious. We seem to always have outfield depth – not so much at the power corners in the infield which is why we have settled for a drunken rapist at third and mike lavallier (OBP guy without speed) and a bunch of guys who cant field (bell/alvarez)…wonder if derek lee could still play? :p

        • I’d only Trade Bell if we get back a decent first base prospects AA or higher along with Quintana. No point in filling one hole and creating another. The whole point in stockpiling our minor league system with PITCHERS is so we can deal from a position of strength……trading from a position of no depth is idiotic.

        • Its a matter of what’s easier to replace- is it easier to replace a star pitcher, given our plethora of prospect pitchers, or easier to replace a .300 hitter with 25-30 HR power- given our lack of impact hitters in the organization.

        • I would be too, Jonah, and I hope that you are correct about Neal electing to not include those two (Glasnow and Bell).

      • The comments about Mercer moving to second once Newman comes up make me cringe. Except if the pitcher is left handed. Then I’m ok with Mercer in the line up.

      • I agree with keeping Newman and Meadows, and hope to see both in Pittsburgh in 2017. Bell has already posted strong numbers offensively in MLB (SSS) and has 6 years of control. But, can he play 1B? The CWS have Abreu, but he will get increasingly more expensive since he opted to begin Arbitration. Bell fits their needs better than Meadows or Newman.

        My prediction is that no matter what the Pirates put on the table, the Yankees can trump the Pirates or Astro’s offers and will get Quintana if they want him. CC’s contract ($25 mil) ends after 2017.

        The CWS Senior Managers have played a strong game so far this off-season with the trades of Sale and Eaton, and I expect they will want the Yankees in the mix. Boston paying big time for Sale means that the Yankees have to respond, and they have the prospects to do so.

          • Y2 – I beg to differ. Quintana is a cost effective move for the Yankees, and they need a 1/2 desperately. Actually paying Sabathia $25 mil for 2017; Quintana $35.3 for 4 years? They have no more lefties after CC leaves, and they may want to unload him at the deadline if they are not close enough to compete. He fits too well to see them walk away from the deal.

            • I’m not saying you are wrong, but I disagree. This isn’t how the new Steinbrenner is running things, he wants to build from within, not sell off 4 of his prized prospects. Of course, if the Sox want the prospects that the Yankees have depth at…..well that’s a different story

    • That would be a horrible trade that would haunt the Pirates for a decade. Jose Quintana is not Clayton Kershaw. Not even remotely close. And not worth the prospects that are being discussed. Hopefully nothing will come of this.

      • I think you are underestimating Quintana greatly. Among pitchers with 160+ innings:
        2016: 11th w/ 5.2WAR in 208 innings, 3.2era
        2015: 18th w/ 4.0WAR in 206 innings, 3.36era
        2014: 27th w/ 3.5WAR in 200 innings, 3.32era
        2013: 11th w/ 5.4WAR in 200 innings, 3.54era

        The guy is consistent and factually a #1 pitcher(what we would HOPE Glasnow becomes). Why not take a sure thing for 4 years while we have a team that can compete? This is what we play for.

        Take Meadows off the table and try to keep Newman. But Glasnow, Bell and a not top 10 guy I would be fine with. Maybe Glasnow turns out to be a stud… Quintana is a #1 and I’ll take it.

        • I don’t disagree that Quintana is special….


          …pitchers are mercurial.

          One pitch thrown the wrong way and you’ve just lost 1-2 years of production.

          As wonderful as it would be to grab a major rotation piece…as a small market team, the Pirates could be sacrificing years of quality production at key positions for a lottery ticket.

          • If you’re calling Quintana a lottery ticket with 4 consecutive MLB #1 starter years with over 200 innings pitched, then a bunch of prospects with no track record are miracles, relatively speaking.

            • A lottery ticket in that you didn’t seem to have read a single thing I wrote…

              Here, let me recap:

              “I don’t disagree that Quintana is special….”

              That last word, special, it means different from others.

              I’d love to have him on the team…but there also comes the risk of injury. What happens…or doesn’t…will be absolutely clear in a couple of years. But a small market team that can’t afford quality free agents is taking a heck of a risk by trading away two of its’ top three prospects.

              One injury to a well-used pitcher, and the team could be set back half a decade.

              Go ahead…ask the A’s if Shark and Hammel were worth Addison Russell…

              • I’d be careful there. Just because the A’s blew 2 big leads in the wild card doesn’t mean the trade wasn’t worth making. You could certainly argue the A’s don’t even make the playoffs without Shark (they snuck into the last WC spot by a game and the back half of their rotation was a mess), and Addison Russell is not anywhere close to the reason they lost 90+ games each of the last two seasons, so it’s not like they miss him.

                • oh c’mon Stephen – Every GM knows with absolute certainty how each player will perform over the next 3-5 years (they get these really awesome 100% accurate projections thanks to all the cool advanced analytics every team has access too!) and that it is totally fair to call Billy Bean an idiot because the As did not win the WS as a result of this obviously bad trade.

              • Should we only try to compete every year just because we’re a small market team? Just be over .500 and content with a wildcard… Every now and then you get a window where all that talent, all those prospect gambles have panned out and you have to jump on that window.

                I’d rather be rebuilding for 7-10 years and take 3 years to go for a championship than always be .500

                • Valid point, Kevin O. I just still agree with Blaine, and also happen to think that there are other options out there that could bring forth the same result that you suggest here, but at less of a cost to our farm system.

          • Well said, and accurately so, Blaine. Plus, I think that everyone needs to take a breath here and remember that there are other pitchers, on other teams, that Neal H. could trade for, and do so without having to risk top tier–Glasnow, Bell, Meadows, Keller, Kramer–prospects in the process.

        • You don’t understand, Chicago is only going to do trade if Meadows is the headliner in the deal. To me it’s time to walk away. I don’t have a problem with trading any of the other prospects. The Nats told NH to forget it when he insisted on their stud position prospect for Cutch. Now it’s time for NH to do the same with Chicago. Glasnow as headliner can bring back a # of #2 types. Explore those or stand pat. Do NOT give up Meadows.

            • I wouldn’t like it to much, but would do it, I just don’t think no Meadows, no Quintana on Sox’s side

              • Yes I would. ” Upside ” offensively, downside with the glove. From what I have seen in him in MiLB, he isn’t nearly as athletic as you have to be to succeed in the field.

          • You don’t “know” that- but I’d agree with you. If the conversation starts with Meadows, it ends with meadows, unless you are getting a lesser but still good outfield prospect back with Quintana.

        • With those numbers I would say he is more of a #2 SP similar to AJ and Liriano. if he could get the ERA under 2.5 then he’d be a #1 SP

          • there are 30 major league teams…
            over the 4 years there are 12 pitchers who have totaled over 800 innings – Quintana is #12 (Liriano led the Pirates with 623)
            Quintana ranks 7th in total fWAR (Cole ranks 23rd)

            looks like Quintana is a number one guy – unless he and Chris Sale are on the same team.

            for extra credit…
            the total fWAR leader of the 4 years is easy
            – but who is #2?

        • Because he is not a sure thing for four years. He is only under contract for four years. There’s no guarantee that he will throw 200 innings per year for the next four seasons, giving him eight seasons in a row at 200 innings per year. In fact, I think that it is highly unlikely that he continues that pace. Pitchers today just do not do that anymore. So much so that I am not willing to give up anything more than one of Glasnow, Keller, or Kramer in taking on the risk. Bell and Meadows are not even in the equation if I am Neal H.

          • But you will guarantee that prospects will be sure to perform at as high a level as Quintana already has for 4 years ? Heh heh….

            • expecting 4 WAR from a total of Glasnow, Bell and the other prospects being mentioned would be a massive disaster. You should get 4 WAR from Glasnow and Bell together next year alone. Let alone the two costing less than 1/5th of Quintana.

      • I personally agree with you Ken. Given the fact that the Cubs seem to be at their peak for the next several years. I think we should keep our elite prospects and try to sign a different potential # 2 starter (which Quintana basically is) that won’t cost as much. They are out there. I sort of wished that the Pirates had gotten Matt Moore. he would have cost less in prospects. They should eschew this White Sox trade and overpay someone like a Tyson Ross (no prospects required) or a Trevor Cahill who’s only 28 or even a pitcher like the Reds hard throwing lefty Tony Cingrani who is only 27. It would cost prospects but not 3 or 4 top twenty prospects.

        • Please name me 5, #2 type SP that are cheaper than Quintana that the Pirates can focus their efforts on.

          • Bill, if you’re referring to salary….Quintana’s is relatively modest by starting pitching standards. But in terms of the prospect return that is being demanded by the White Sox, he is certainly not cheap. The required players needed to make this deal happen are approaching the return that they got for Chris Sales. It is greater than what Houston balked at. Their demand is steep for a pitcher who although is durable, does not even through harder than Jeff Locke. Good as he has been, he is still a soft tossing lefty who tops out at 92 mph. He will never be as good as Liriano was in his prime, who was a hard throwing lefty who threw in the high 90’s. I would also be wary of the sheer number of innings that he has pitched over the last 4 years. That is a lot of stress innings for a pitcher on a losing team. Sounds like he might be due for an injury. Bill, I don’t need to name 5 starting #2 pitchers that are cheaper (in a trade) than Quintana…i just need to name one…Jake Odorizzi. He would cost less in prospects and also has a modest salary.

            • I could not agree more, Marc. Like everyone on this site, I’d love to have Quintana in black and gold. But not at the supposed asking price that the Sox have on the table. I say if the cost is as high as we are being led to believe, then move on to another trade or free agent option.

    • I’d like to keep Diaz. We have an injury prone catchers and I think we will be seeing Diaz catch in PNC sometime this year.

      Perhaps a different prospect? Garcia/ Hanson/ or Osuna.

      • Yeah, Diaz is one of those injury prone catchers. That is why he didn’t catch innings at PNC last year.

    • Trading Diaz is not a good idea. We have little depth at catcher after the McGuire and Gushue trades. Let’s not forget the days when we had to use catchers named Fryar and Kratz. We trade Diaz, and all we will have at catcher will be Stallings, who can’t hit, and Jin-De Jhang, and little depth even at the lower levels.

      • The reason we had to use Fryer and Kratz is because Cervelli, Stewart and DIAZ, yes the same one, were injured.

    • This, IMO is a pretty high price for Quintana, I truely believe he could be, and will be, had for less.

    • We need Hayes and Diaz- We need something more like Glasnow, Newman, Craig, Clay Holmes, and Drew Hutchison. You only trade from a position of strength, and you never trade something you need to get something you need…..its a sum zero game. The GM’s job is to close holes without opening new ones in terms of talent and finances.

    • That won’t get it done Jonah…Meadows or nothing…I would not make this deal..Q is due for an injury

Comments are closed.