TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 19, 2015 16:38:01 GMT -5
I would if Stras comes with an extension, which could be why the kid is upset ($7.4m). I know, I know.. Boarass, but still, maybe he's less certain about his arm following TJS.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jan 19, 2015 17:26:55 GMT -5
I would guess to extend Strats today you would have to at a minimum tact on the Tanaka contract (with the opt out) to the end of his arbitration years. Probably more, but most certainty not less than.
|
|
|
Post by xanderbogaerts2 on Jan 19, 2015 17:58:12 GMT -5
Strasburg isn't worth Mookie Betts. with everything factoring in it's not worth it imo.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 19, 2015 18:01:38 GMT -5
I would guess to extend Strats today you would have to at a minimum tact on the Tanaka contract (with the opt out) to the end of his arbitration years. Probably more, but most certainty not less than. 4 more years, 5 total. Bump him up to $20m for '16 and add 3 more @ $28m. Would you trade Xander for 5 years of Stras @ $111m? Tempting...
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Jan 19, 2015 20:44:38 GMT -5
Two years of control over Strasburg vs. six for Mookie (and five for Xander) -- the thought is a straight no-no for me. Yes, the rotation is this teams primary area of need right now, and Strasburg is basically an ace while Mookie, good as he may be, is slated to be a corner outfielder in 2015. But, that's too much of a long term, cost-controlled mega-asset to move for just two years of an ace who will require a sizable extension if he's to be retained. Considering his talent plus Boras, I'm not betting on an extension coming with any trade.
Say Mookie averages 3.5 WAR per season over his pre-FA years with the Sox -- that's 21 WAR, which may be a conservative estimation -- and Strasburg puts up 8 WAR over two years with the Sox (averaging ERA and FIP-based WAR), which may be optimistic. Yes, the team would probably be more balanced and suited chase a WS title in 2015/16, as we have Nava/Craig/Victorino, more than capable of being a plus combination in RF, but two years of Strasburg for Mookie is at least one season too few.
As for Xander, the above reasoning holds true. He's still going to become a terrific offensive shortstop, and I'm not about to ship him off and hand Brock Holt and (after a couple months) Deven Marrero the shortstop position. Strasburg would be sweet, but let's hold onto the young, MLB-ready phenoms who we can build this team around for several years to come. I would trade two prospects for Hamels (one in the 1-5 range, one/two after that) before this.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 19, 2015 22:49:58 GMT -5
The Sox most certainly could use Strasburg - who couldn't? But to give up six years of Betts or five years of Bogaerts? I wouldn't do it?
As great as Strasburg is, I'd rather see the Sox deal less for a rental ace come July like a Johnny Cueto. Then I'd rather see the Sox actually take the plunge and spend the necessary $175 - $200 million to secure an ace, whether it be Zimmerman or Cueto during the winter of 2015-2016 or hang onto the money and go crazy and spend even more $ to secure the younger Strasburg a season later.
I don't see the need to give up the farm or deal Betts or Bogaerts to have Strasburg for only two seasons, and when you consider the injury rate to pitchers, I really wouldn't want to do it.
In a perfect world, the Sox pony up the dough to sign Strasburg when he hits free agency, especially considering that if you trade for Strasburg, there's no way Bora$ lets him get extended - Bora$ always gets his guys to free agency and winks in NYY's direction.
Honestly I think the Sox most realistic target is Cueto whether it be in July or whether it's thru free agency in November/December 2015.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 19, 2015 22:59:55 GMT -5
I'd like to emphasize that Stras looks like a Pedro type talent, and at the same age as when we signed Pedro no less. That if he can be extended for 4 additional years we'll have him for as long as we will Xander. And the difference in signing Sras opposed to retaining Xander is money not coming out of our respective bank accounts. In other words, this is a freaking no brainer. If WASH will have it, BC will approve it, and Stras will sign it, however, is another question.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 19, 2015 23:04:27 GMT -5
If Strasburg was amenable to that sort of extension (I.e., a no-brainer one), you'd think the Nationals would give it to him rather than trading him.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 19, 2015 23:57:28 GMT -5
logical
Pedro was traded instead of signed because, reports have it anyway, he was too small to last as a starter. it could be that WASH feels the same way about Stras durability. If there weren't differing opinions in baseball there would be far fewer quality trades.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 20, 2015 0:31:11 GMT -5
I'd like to emphasize that Stras looks like a Pedro type talent, and at the same age as when we signed Pedro no less. That if he can be extended for 4 additional years we'll have him for as long as we will Xander. And the difference in signing Sras opposed to retaining Xander is money not coming out of our respective bank accounts. In other words, this is a freaking no brainer. If WASH will have it, BC will approve it, and Stras will sign it, however, is another question. No he doesn't.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 20, 2015 0:38:21 GMT -5
Disagree; don't think Stras looks better at the same age. But I didn't say that. I said they were similar talents.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Jan 20, 2015 0:47:44 GMT -5
Disagree; don't think Stras looks better at the same age. But I didn't say that. I said they were similar talents. Name HR/9 K% BB% K-BB% AVG WHIP BABIP LOB% ERA- FIP- xFIP- ERA FIP Pedro Martinez 0.76 27.7 % 6.7 % 21.0 % .212 1.05 .279 75.9 % 66 67 78 2.93 2.91 Stephen Strasburg 0.82 28.5 % 6.4 % 22.2 % .223 1.09 .297 74.2 % 80 75 72 3.02 2.84 Now, they pitched in different environments of course. Pedro had a tighter strike zone and more PED-aided hitters to worry about. So rather than focus on the the strikeout rate and FIP, it's the stats scaled to a league-average reference point that you want to be scoping out: ERA- and FIP-, both of which Pedro has a pretty significant advantage in. Also note that I quickly just pulled their entire career stats, so Pedro's line includes his final four seasons during which he was a shell of his former self. Cutting those years off yields: Name HR/9 K% BB% K-BB% AVG WHIP BABIP LOB% ERA- FIP- xFIP- ERA FIP Pedro Martinez 0.69 28.5 % 6.6 % 21.9 % .206 1.02 .276 76.7 % 61 62 73 2.72 2.74 Just an absolute beast.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 20, 2015 1:11:46 GMT -5
Yes, an absolute beast but, no, I was being snarky to fenwaythehardway's typically lacking criticism. But an argument could still be made. Pedro will, without almost any doubt whatsoever, be considered the better pitcher in the end, but Stras first 3 years (ignoring the TJ seasons) were very similar to his.
More than that though, he is an outstanding pitcher. We need that, even if not Pedro II.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 20, 2015 3:59:09 GMT -5
I like Strasburg but you can't compare him to Pedro. Pedro was coming off a cy young season, Strasburg was no where near a cy young pitcher last year. He is more like a top 20-30 pitcher with upside.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 20, 2015 6:56:09 GMT -5
Strasburg isn't anywhere close to Pedro. And with Boras, you're trading only for those 2 years. I doubt being on the team even gives them an advantage in re-signing him as a free agent.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jan 20, 2015 9:37:10 GMT -5
Stratsburg not = Pedro. No way he signs a 5 year 111M dollar extension, or essentially what James Sheilds will get.
Is there any package that does not include Bogaerts or Betts that makes sense for both the Nationals and the Red Sox?
I still think Fister is most likely to move, to a team not named the Red Sox. I think there would be a good amount of interest in Tanner Roark from other teams too.
ADD: The only possible way I could see Bogaerts traded to the Nationals is if we also got back Desmond. Still I don't think Bogaerts or Betts would be traded for anyone available by trade.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
|
Nationals
Jan 20, 2015 13:46:23 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by nomar on Jan 20, 2015 13:46:23 GMT -5
He'll get 5/110 at least. 22M a year sounds about right for what he would receive as a FA.
I would center a deal around Swihart or maybe Rodriguez + Margot.
Easy call to say no to dealing Bogaerts or Betts for him. Desmond doesn't interest me that much even if we were to trade Bogaerts.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 20, 2015 14:08:08 GMT -5
He'll get 5/110 at least. 22M a year sounds about right for what he would receive as a FA. I would center a deal around Swihart or maybe Rodriguez + Margot. Easy call to say no to dealing Bogaerts or Betts for him. Desmond doesn't interest me that much even if we were to trade Bogaerts. He'll get more than Scherzer.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Jan 20, 2015 14:22:35 GMT -5
He'll get 5/110 at least. 22M a year sounds about right for what he would receive as a FA. I would center a deal around Swihart or maybe Rodriguez + Margot. Easy call to say no to dealing Bogaerts or Betts for him. Desmond doesn't interest me that much even if we were to trade Bogaerts. He'll get more than Scherzer.Agree
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 20, 2015 15:49:38 GMT -5
I wonder if now they would be amenable to trading Fister. Fister is not the #1 that you are looking for but he's clearly better than Masterson or Kelly. An interesting idea would be trading Pedroia over there and getting Fister, Giolito, and Cole back in return.....but then again, talk radio might burn down if that happened.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 20, 2015 20:39:59 GMT -5
He'll get 5/110 at least. 22M a year sounds about right for what he would receive as a FA. I would center a deal around Swihart or maybe Rodriguez + Margot. Easy call to say no to dealing Bogaerts or Betts for him. Desmond doesn't interest me that much even if we were to trade Bogaerts. He'll get more than Scherzer. There's no way on this god's earth he gets more than Scherzer as he's still in arbitration. So he's making $7.4m this year, $15~m next year, likely Lester money thereafter. Given those numbers, and his age, it's not like he would be taking a hit if he's extended for my proposed 4/$98m. And when that contract completes, with his 30th year season, then he can sign for Scherzer money. Stars align.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 20, 2015 20:40:49 GMT -5
He'll get more than Scherzer when he's 28.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 20, 2015 20:45:30 GMT -5
He'll get more than Scherzer when he's 28. The risk that he may weigh though, is of his durability. Money in hand and all that. I just think it's odd that reports came out after Scherzer was signed that he was unhappy. That led me to believe he may actually want an extension, given his on the shelf experience of 3 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 20, 2015 21:21:04 GMT -5
The money in hand argument makes a lot of sense for your typical pre-arb guy, but Strasburg, between the contract he signed when he got drafted and his last two arb raises, has already made a combined $26m+ during his brief career. Considering how much cash he's earned already and the fact that he is two years away from free agency (where he projects to receive one of the largest contracts ever awarded to a pitcher), it's hard to imagine him wanting to leave very much money on the table in terms of an extension.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 20, 2015 21:34:36 GMT -5
ESPECIALLY with Boras as his agent. Geesh. He'll be somewhere between Scherzer and Kershaw.
|
|