SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Post by charliezink16 on Dec 5, 2013 2:45:13 GMT -5
Just wanted to check in on how people would feel about a Pederson trade, so here it is. Will Middlebrooks for Joc Pederson straight up.
Hear me out. I don't need to go into all the reasons WMB is a viable trade candidate, but there are ways to fill the position. Whether it's bringing back Drew and moving X to 3rd or signing a stop-gap such as Juan Uribe/Aramis Ramirez to bridge the gap to Garin, it can be done. (Personally, if this somehow actually happened, I'd assume Drew would be returning too to eliminate the dropoff in talent) For the Dodgers, there's a huge hole at 3B for them, and top prospect Corey Seager doesn't really figure into the plans for another two years. There isn't a top 3B option on the market for them to pursue either. Additionally, as we all know, there's simply no room in the outfield for Joc ATM.
Here's why I like Joc Pederson, he fits the mold of what Ben C is looking for. High OBP, solid speed, solid range in center. But why I really would like to see this move is for a different position; right field. I don't know why I worry so much about it, but the thought of having anything BUT a fast RF w/ outstanding range worries me in Fenway. I'd rather not go back to the Wily Mo days in the field. I probably shouldn't be worrying about RF right now, with Victorino locked up for another two years, but his injuries worry me, and it's never too early to find his successor. Especially when you look internally and see a lack of top OF talent in the minors. So trade for Joc, shift him to RF (where he should fit well considering he's got solid enough range to play CF), and if everything works out call him up when he's 23 to succeed Victorino.
And for the record, I wouldn't be opposed to Ben bringing in a big name CF'er within the next two offseasons and shifting Bradley to RF. I think he'd be an outstanding fit there too. Thoughts?
ADD: Sorry, didn't see the "Dodgers OF" thread. It's late, I'm fading, feel free to merge the threads.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Dec 6, 2013 10:46:13 GMT -5
Dodgers need a 3Bman. WMB for Joc works for me. Sign a Uribe or similar for one year 'till Cecchini is ready. Joc should be ready, too, about that time.
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Dec 6, 2013 21:39:33 GMT -5
Dodgers need a 3Bman. WMB for Joc works for me. Sign a Uribe or similar for one year 'till Cecchini is ready. Joc should be ready, too, about that time. Exactly, thanks for the response man. I just want people to tell me if I'm being crazy or reasonable. Especially w/ the JBJ idea, because it's been floating around in my head for some time.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Dec 6, 2013 21:45:35 GMT -5
Joc Peterson is one of their best prospects if not the best. They'll only move him in a package for the elite players that might be available via trade. Me thinks.
|
|
|
Post by juniorp90 on Dec 7, 2013 10:43:02 GMT -5
Joc Peterson is one of their best prospects if not the best. They'll only move him in a package for the elite players that might be available via trade. Me thinks. Exactly. Dodgers need 3Bman, but Joc Pederson would not be the candidate of the Dodgers for a change, Why change your # 1 prospect for a player who has not yet coalesced into big leagues? Indeed, if we consider that the Dodgers are in the market to Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier, much less change.
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Dec 7, 2013 15:23:08 GMT -5
Yeah I'd say I'm underestimating Joc's trade value. Should be worth more than WMB, though I feel as if people here undervalue him. Regardless, I'd still like to see Boston look into the option at the very least.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Dec 7, 2013 15:55:55 GMT -5
Joc Peterson is one of their best prospects if not the best. They'll only move him in a package for the elite players that might be available via trade. Me thinks. Exactly. Dodgers need 3Bman, but Joc Pederson would not be the candidate of the Dodgers for a change, Why change your # 1 prospect for a player who has not yet coalesced into big leagues? Indeed, if we consider that the Dodgers are in the market to Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier, much less change. How long does it take to "coalesce" in the major leagues? Will has played 169 games over two seasons. Are you saying that WMB is not coming together with his teamates to field a good team? In that case Pederson has not done so as well, considering he has not yet made an ML appearance. Perhaps WMB has not yet established himself as an everday third baseman. But the potential is there given his talents. At least there's more of a record with him to analyze. It may take a little more than WMB to pull that trade off, but it's worth exploring considering the Dodgers' need.
|
|
|
Post by juniorp90 on Dec 7, 2013 17:32:35 GMT -5
Exactly. Dodgers need 3Bman, but Joc Pederson would not be the candidate of the Dodgers for a change, Why change your # 1 prospect for a player who has not yet coalesced into big leagues? Indeed, if we consider that the Dodgers are in the market to Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier, much less change. How long does it take to "coalesce" in the major leagues? Will has played 169 games over two seasons. Are you saying that WMB is not coming together with his teamates to field a good team? In that case Pederson has not done so as well, considering he has not yet made an ML appearance. Perhaps WMB has not yet established himself as an everday third baseman. But the potential is there given his talents. At least there's more of a record with him to analyze. It may take a little more than WMB to pull that trade off, but it's worth exploring considering the Dodgers' need. Right, the fact that he has not put up big numbers yet, does not go away the talent he has, what we're talking about here, given the tendency not to exceed the expectations WMB is not up to what's Joc Pederson. Remember that WMB was never in the top 100 MLB prospects, Joc Pederson yes, if you go by the (I'd like to change Boston) should offer more than WMB, change multiplayer ... No one another.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Dec 7, 2013 17:47:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Dec 8, 2013 12:14:47 GMT -5
I actually think WMB for Pederson is fairly reasonable. If the Red Sox brought back Drew it is a move that would make a lot of sense.
|
|
|
Post by p23w on Dec 8, 2013 16:22:09 GMT -5
I actually think WMB for Pederson is fairly reasonable. If the Red Sox brought back Drew it is a move that would make a lot of sense. I think it makes less sense for the Dodgers to do this. I would believe they would prefer to deal one of Kemp or Eithier and ease Peterson into their Of. They have a reasonable 3B in Uribe. I liken this to a trade for Christian Yelich. The Marlins have a black hole at 3B. Middlebrooks works for them better than for the Dodgers. So it comes down to what deal would you pursue. Peterson or Yelich? I like them both, I just think our trade chips match the Marlins better than they do with the Dodgers.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Dec 8, 2013 16:57:35 GMT -5
I actually think WMB for Pederson is fairly reasonable. If the Red Sox brought back Drew it is a move that would make a lot of sense. I think it makes less sense for the Dodgers to do this. I would believe they would prefer to deal one of Kemp or Eithier and ease Peterson into their Of. They have a reasonable 3B in Uribe. I liken this to a trade for Christian Yelich. The Marlins have a black hole at 3B. Middlebrooks works for them better than for the Dodgers. So it comes down to what deal would you pursue. Peterson or Yelich? I like them both, I just think our trade chips match the Marlins better than they do with the Dodgers. Unless I missed something - Uribe is a free agent (and old).
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Dec 8, 2013 17:22:20 GMT -5
I think it makes less sense for the Dodgers to do this. I would believe they would prefer to deal one of Kemp or Eithier and ease Peterson into their Of. They have a reasonable 3B in Uribe. I liken this to a trade for Christian Yelich. The Marlins have a black hole at 3B. Middlebrooks works for them better than for the Dodgers. So it comes down to what deal would you pursue. Peterson or Yelich? I like them both, I just think our trade chips match the Marlins better than they do with the Dodgers. Unless I missed something - Uribe is a free agent (and old). Old? At age 34 when multi year contracts are being thrown around to 35+ players right and left? We're long looking long range here. Uribe played in 133 games this past season with respectible .278/.331/.438 numbers.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 8, 2013 18:28:51 GMT -5
I actually think WMB for Pederson is fairly reasonable. If the Red Sox brought back Drew it is a move that would make a lot of sense. I think it makes less sense for the Dodgers to do this. I would believe they would prefer to deal one of Kemp or Eithier and ease Peterson into their Of. They have a reasonable 3B in Uribe. I liken this to a trade for Christian Yelich. The Marlins have a black hole at 3B. Middlebrooks works for them better than for the Dodgers. So it comes down to what deal would you pursue. Peterson or Yelich? I like them both, I just think our trade chips match the Marlins better than they do with the Dodgers. Trading one of Kemp and Ethier would still leave them with a Crawford-Puig-Kemp/Ethier outfield. The Marlins, on the other hand, have a bunch of young guys who might not pan out with Yelich, Ozuna, and Marisnick along with Stanton. Given how low some are on Marisnick despite his tools, I really can't see them trading Yelich. Pederson makes a lot more sense as a prospect that might get traded than Yelich.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Dec 8, 2013 19:44:43 GMT -5
Old? At age 34 when multi year contracts are being thrown around to 35+ players right and left? We're long looking long range here. Uribe played in 133 games this past season with respectible .278/.331/.438 numbers. Since he is a FA and will be 35 when the season starts - i don't think he is part of the Dodgers long term plans at the position. He would be a solid short-term fill in for a few teams. (especially if he can still play a respectable SS) If I'm the Dodgers, I would probably look to trade Pederson for Cecchini and then sign Uribe (or Drew) to a short term deal.
|
|
|
Post by bmitchsox on Dec 8, 2013 22:57:17 GMT -5
I actually think WMB for Pederson is fairly reasonable. If the Red Sox brought back Drew it is a move that would make a lot of sense. I think it makes less sense for the Dodgers to do this. I would believe they would prefer to deal one of Kemp or Eithier and ease Peterson into their Of. They have a reasonable 3B in Uribe. I liken this to a trade for Christian Yelich. The Marlins have a black hole at 3B. Middlebrooks works for them better than for the Dodgers. So it comes down to what deal would you pursue. Peterson or Yelich? I like them both, I just think our trade chips match the Marlins better than they do with the Dodgers. I'd offer Middlebrooks, Nava, Morales or Britton for Yelich and Cishek. Then look at Infante to plug third for a year or two until Cecchini is ready. I like Pederson, but I would definitely prefer Yelich.
|
|
|
Post by p23w on Dec 9, 2013 22:05:56 GMT -5
I think it makes less sense for the Dodgers to do this. I would believe they would prefer to deal one of Kemp or Eithier and ease Peterson into their Of. They have a reasonable 3B in Uribe. I liken this to a trade for Christian Yelich. The Marlins have a black hole at 3B. Middlebrooks works for them better than for the Dodgers. So it comes down to what deal would you pursue. Peterson or Yelich? I like them both, I just think our trade chips match the Marlins better than they do with the Dodgers. Trading one of Kemp and Ethier would still leave them with a Crawford-Puig-Kemp/Ethier outfield. The Marlins, on the other hand, have a bunch of young guys who might not pan out with Yelich, Ozuna, and Marisnick along with Stanton. Given how low some are on Marisnick despite his tools, I really can't see them trading Yelich. Pederson makes a lot more sense as a prospect that might get traded than Yelich. I disagree. Pederson is a ways away. Yelich has shown something at the big league level. The Marlins have expressed an interest in Middlebrooks. Given that were last in the league in home runs, unlike the Dodgers, I think they are more motivated. 416 AB;s with one hone run from 38 yo Placido is not getting;' it done. If Middlebrooks and Yelich are a wash in the OBS department, you have to believe that a full year from Ozuna and Marisnick are going to far exceed Poloncos' pathetic season. Or a three way. Dodgers get Middlebrooks RS get Yelich, Marlins get Uribe and a prospect and Morales and one of Peavy or Dempster. I think it makes more sense for the Dodgers to hold onto Pederson, given their OF health issues even after a trade of Kemp or Ethier. I'm thinking they deal Ethier. Van Slyke can fill in for if Kemp can't answer the bell.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 11, 2013 7:11:39 GMT -5
Trading one of Kemp and Ethier would still leave them with a Crawford-Puig-Kemp/Ethier outfield. The Marlins, on the other hand, have a bunch of young guys who might not pan out with Yelich, Ozuna, and Marisnick along with Stanton. Given how low some are on Marisnick despite his tools, I really can't see them trading Yelich. Pederson makes a lot more sense as a prospect that might get traded than Yelich. I disagree. Pederson is a ways away. Yelich has shown something at the big league level. The Marlins have expressed an interest in Middlebrooks. Given that were last in the league in home runs, unlike the Dodgers, I think they are more motivated. 416 AB;s with one hone run from 38 yo Placido is not getting;' it done. If Middlebrooks and Yelich are a wash in the OBS department, you have to believe that a full year from Ozuna and Marisnick are going to far exceed Poloncos' pathetic season. Or a three way. Dodgers get Middlebrooks RS get Yelich, Marlins get Uribe and a prospect and Morales and one of Peavy or Dempster. I think it makes more sense for the Dodgers to hold onto Pederson, given their OF health issues even after a trade of Kemp or Ethier. I'm thinking they deal Ethier. Van Slyke can fill in for if Kemp can't answer the bell. A) Pederson is not a "ways away." He had a full season in Double-A last year. He's going to be in Triple-A this year. B) You are significantly overestimating how good the other Marlins outfielders are compared to Yelich, imo.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Dec 11, 2013 18:08:15 GMT -5
Pederson much > than Yelich long term IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 13, 2013 6:52:20 GMT -5
Pederson much > than Yelich long term IMO. Based on what?
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Dec 17, 2013 11:52:12 GMT -5
I think it makes less sense for the Dodgers to do this. I would believe they would prefer to deal one of Kemp or Eithier and ease Peterson into their Of. They have a reasonable 3B in Uribe. I liken this to a trade for Christian Yelich. The Marlins have a black hole at 3B. Middlebrooks works for them better than for the Dodgers. So it comes down to what deal would you pursue. Peterson or Yelich? I like them both, I just think our trade chips match the Marlins better than they do with the Dodgers. I'd offer Middlebrooks, Nava, Morales or Britton for Yelich and Cishek. Then look at Infante to plug third for a year or two until Cecchini is ready. I like Pederson, but I would definitely prefer Yelich. What does this do for Miami? What possible reason is there for Miami to trade Yelich; a top 15 prospect in 2013 and someone who hit a .341 wOBA in 62 games as a 22 yo rookie? He's their 3rd best "25 and under" player behind only Fernandez and Stanton. Miami isn't competing in 2014 or likely even 2015; it makes no sense for them to trade their studs unless you blew them away. The conversation would start with Cecchini and Ranaudo and move up from there.
|
|
|
Post by bmitchsox on Dec 17, 2013 17:32:35 GMT -5
They have strong interest in Middlebrooks who is our number 6 prospect "25 and under" and has great power potential. Two years ago when he wasn't hurt, he was killing it and proved as one of the top 3B prospects in the league. He's been hurt with multiple injuries, and will finally get to prove himself this year. Nava is cost controlled and hit nearly .300, and Britton is young and could step in as their potential set up man soon. A lot falls on Middlebrooks in the deal, but Miami could end up with a great deal here. Not saying they definitely accept, but the way Jennings up-talks WMB he might do something like this.
|
|
|
Post by wskeleton76 on Dec 18, 2013 1:03:30 GMT -5
I would do this trade without any hesitation. I doubt WMB will figure out.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Dec 19, 2013 11:54:27 GMT -5
What you you think of Lackey for Pederson + Julio Urias. The Dodgers are less willing to give up prospects for established star this year, but if this offer was on the table I would strongly consider it. It frees up a roster spot, strengthens our farm system, and gives us the payroll space needed to resign Drew. We would still have enough ML Starting pitching depth with Webster + Workman basically ready for spot starts at the beginning of the year and Barnes/Ranaudo following shortly behind. I would worry a little about 2015, as we would only have control of Doubrount and Buch in front of minor league depth.
We could (try to) dump Dempster's salary and resign Drew the same way, but Trading Lackey instead would give us two very interesting prospects. We are built to win in 2014 so it wouldn't make much sense to trade MLB talent for prospects. Maybe it is just my interest in Urias.
|
|
|
Post by bmitchsox on Dec 19, 2013 18:44:34 GMT -5
I would definitely do that deal, and both teams possibly could as well. We get good young talent, and allow Workman the chance to earn his spot as the #5. Lackey had a great year, but theres no saying how his arm will hold up, and he's getting old (35).. he probably only has 2 or 3 years left. I like the idea of building through young talent.
|
|
|