|
Post by pokeefe363 on Jul 22, 2015 17:32:41 GMT -5
Who says no scenario 1: Gausman for Holt Who says no scenario 2: Gausman for Victorino, one or two B prospect(s) (Marrero, Buttrey, Stankewicz, Rijo) They definitely say no to the second one. If they like Holt they may say yes to it, but it would probably take a second piece. I would think Buchholz would appeal to the Orioles too. They need guys cost controlled beyond this year.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 22, 2015 18:02:09 GMT -5
I don't think either team would do Buchholz for Gausman. Buchholz's potential upside, even for 120 innings a year, is just too high for Boston to sell on him. Getting 120 good innings really helps the Red Sox, even if it is in a frustrating fashion. On the other hand, until he's back on the mound his elbow is going to be too high risk. The Orioles can't trade Gausman for a player who likely won't help much this year and might be out a huge portion of next. Basically, Buchholz has enough potential value that the Red Sox should hold onto him unless blown away, and so much short-term risk that it makes no sense for Baltimore to do so.
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Jul 22, 2015 18:13:47 GMT -5
I don't think either team would do Buchholz for Gausman. Buchholz's potential upside, even for 120 innings a year, is just too high for Boston to sell on him. Getting 120 good innings really helps the Red Sox, even if it is in a frustrating fashion. On the other hand, until he's back on the mound his elbow is going to be too high risk. The Orioles can't trade Gausman for a player who likely won't help much this year and might be out a huge portion of next. Basically, Buchholz has enough potential value that the Red Sox should hold onto him unless blown away, and so much short-term risk that it makes no sense for Baltimore to do so. Gausman is a former top 20 prospect and exactly the type of pitcher we should be going after. I don't know if any other piece we have would appeal to them enough (Holt, Tazawa, Uehara, Victorino, etc). I think we do what it takes to get guys like Gausman personally.
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Jul 22, 2015 19:16:03 GMT -5
If you think NESN ratings or television revenue are not factored in on high profile player signings, you keep drinking the kool aid. Of course it is. To what percentage we'll never know. Read Francona's book about Werner, or have we gone over that before as well? 75 million in BB money not to factor in a big market club is peanuts. Sandoval has value. ... but we all expected an above average hitter and defensive third base for 2015 … I really really really dislike the "everyone thought" argument. It's most often irrelevant, but also just not true.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jul 22, 2015 20:44:53 GMT -5
I don't think either team would do Buchholz for Gausman. Buchholz's potential upside, even for 120 innings a year, is just too high for Boston to sell on him. Getting 120 good innings really helps the Red Sox, even if it is in a frustrating fashion. On the other hand, until he's back on the mound his elbow is going to be too high risk. The Orioles can't trade Gausman for a player who likely won't help much this year and might be out a huge portion of next. Basically, Buchholz has enough potential value that the Red Sox should hold onto him unless blown away, and so much short-term risk that it makes no sense for Baltimore to do so. Gausman is a former top 20 prospect and exactly the type of pitcher we should be going after. I don't know if any other piece we have would appeal to them enough (Holt, Tazawa, Uehara, Victorino, etc). I think we do what it takes to get guys like Gausman personally. I could not agree more. There are a couple of contenders that have these type prospects that we should go after at the trade deadline like Ross of the Nationals.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Jul 22, 2015 21:41:11 GMT -5
Who says no scenario 1: Gausman for Holt Who says no scenario 2: Gausman for Victorino, one or two B prospect(s) (Marrero, Buttrey, Stankewicz, Rijo) They definitely say no to the second one. If they like Holt they may say yes to it, but it would probably take a second piece. My take is Baltimore has higher sights than Holt offensively. Boston would need to get a third team involved here unless Baltimore wants Hanley. Question is what team would be willing to trade a quality bat but not be interested in just working out a deal directly with Baltimore for Gausman? Add: I also think Duquette would have a hard time risking a future of facing both Rodriguez and Gausman year after year as the #2 and #3 in the Red Sox rotation especially after watching Rodriguez take off after the trade.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Jul 22, 2015 22:16:23 GMT -5
Expanding on the idea of trading for Gausman using Hanley Ramirez as the central piece. Baltimore has currently received production from all LFers at a combined slash of .219/.289/.344 with 8 HRs in comparison to Hanleys .261/.305/.471 with 19 HRs. Baltimore has had decent production from the DH spot but have no long term commitments blocking the position so Hanley isn't restricted to LF every game.
Baltimore is also shedding ( before considering any resigns ) salaries of Chris Davis (12 mil), Bud Norris (8.8 mil), Wieters (8.3 mil), Chen (4.75 mil), Tommy Hunter (4.65 mil), O'Day (4.25 mil) and Pearce (3.7 mil). Hanley is owed 8 mil remaining in 2015 and 22.75 mil in each of 2016, 2017 and 2018. The question is how much salary would require to be eaten for Baltimore to have interest in this transaction?
My initial valuation would be around 13 mil. Half of this years remaining salary (4 mil) plus 3 mil in each of the following years reducing his salary to 19.75 mil per in 2016, 2017 and 2018. There is something psychological in fans reaction to a guy being a 20 mil or more player vs an under 20 mil per year player even though it's absurd in regards to the marginal difference in salary commitment.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Jul 23, 2015 8:00:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 23, 2015 8:17:56 GMT -5
Bradford seems like a nice guy. As an analyst... Well, let's just say he seems like a nice guy.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 23, 2015 9:14:18 GMT -5
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,917
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 23, 2015 10:20:40 GMT -5
Good type of target for us.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 23, 2015 10:59:59 GMT -5
I agree but he's a former top 5 prospect who has a few good years under his belt and signed to a team friendly deal for 5 more seasons. I think they'd ask for Swihart but I'd try to deal from Vazquez, Johnson and JBJ types.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,917
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 23, 2015 11:12:26 GMT -5
I agree but he's a former top 5 prospect who has a few good years under his belt and signed to a team friendly deal for 5 more seasons. I think they'd ask for Swihart but I'd try to deal from Vazquez, Johnson and JBJ types. Swihart for Teheran is arguably a fair deal IMO. Given the state of our team, I would strongly consider pulling the trigger on that with Vazquez in the wings and his prodigious D. I may rather try to package him for someone like Sonny Gray or a longshot bigger deal for Sale, but at some point we need to make a move for a TOR starter with some youth.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 23, 2015 11:14:39 GMT -5
I agree but he's a former top 5 prospect who has a few good years under his belt and signed to a team friendly deal for 5 more seasons. I think they'd ask for Swihart but I'd try to deal from Vazquez, Johnson and JBJ types. I agree that the asking price would be Swihart. So, do you make that deal (assume that the other flotsam and jetsam you'd like to trade is not acceptable), straight up? I don't. ATL doesn't have to trade him, so they likely won't without getting a top 50-type prospect. Now, if the price were JBJ ++, yeah, I'd likely make that deal. I also note that although Teheran has pitched better recently, he hasn't had a good year and, specifically, hasn't had good command. There has been some speculation (unfounded, thus far) that perhaps Teheran pitched through an injury earlier this year, but I'd be concerned why ATL is putting Teheran on the block.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 23, 2015 11:21:12 GMT -5
They definitely say no to the second one. If they like Holt they may say yes to it, but it would probably take a second piece. I would think Buchholz would appeal to the Orioles too. They need guys cost controlled beyond this year. I'd happily package Holt and Koji if it could get Gausman, it still seems a little light on our side to me, but those are two pieces that could really help them down the stretch
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 23, 2015 11:26:59 GMT -5
While Swihart would be fair I don't do that. They can't get rid of Chris Johnson id try to take on his salary to back up 3b/1B and keep our top guys out.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jul 23, 2015 11:40:45 GMT -5
... but we all expected an above average hitter and defensive third base for 2015 … I really really really dislike the "everyone thought" argument. It's most often irrelevant, but also just not true. I really dislike when people make arguments off fragments of sentences. I also really dislike the triple use of really without any support of an argument.But please, tell me how it is irrelevant and not true? Please show me the person who thought Sandoval would have less than a 90 wRC+ (or any other similar batting stat 10% worse than league average) for the first time in career, in his 8th professional season as a 28 year old, and their logic behind it. Show me the person who didn't think Sandoval was one of the top 10 free agents in the class. Show me a projection system that didn't have him at least a league average hitter. Show me any data at all that shows this guy would not of been a good player in 2015. Edit: Sorry, not trying to derail this thread. I won't post on this subject again unless it's in the off topic forums.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 23, 2015 11:45:48 GMT -5
I would think Buchholz would appeal to the Orioles too. They need guys cost controlled beyond this year. I'd happily package Holt and Koji if it could get Gausman, it still seems a little light on our side to me, but those are two pieces that could really help them down the stretch I think the last thing BAL wants to do is trade more prospects to us for our relief pitchers.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 23, 2015 12:20:49 GMT -5
... but we all expected an above average hitter and defensive third base for 2015 … I really really really dislike the "everyone thought" argument. It's most often irrelevant, but also just not true. How about "no one thought" he'd be the worst position player in the majors?
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jul 23, 2015 13:34:21 GMT -5
“@jeffpassan: Sources: Cleveland has been willing to listen on pitching, particularly Carlos Carrasco. May be a match there with Toronto. They've talked.”
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 23, 2015 13:36:36 GMT -5
Sounds like we could match up well with SD. Marrero, JBJ and Margot. Although I don't think I'd trade Margot for Ross. I don't trust SD pitchers. I could see an Alonso trade though since we could use a 1B.
Rosenthall tweet #Padres biggest needs: SS and CF.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 23, 2015 13:37:26 GMT -5
“@jeffpassan: Sources: Cleveland has been willing to listen on pitching, particularly Carlos Carrasco. May be a match there with Toronto. They've talked.” This is a guy id trade Margot+ for.
|
|
|
Post by cheers on Jul 23, 2015 13:45:16 GMT -5
It kind of feels like a deal with the A's might be in the works... Kelly takes Miley's start yesterday. Nava doesn't start over Nap or Shane vs. a righty. Marrero pulled from the PawSox lineup today.
These are all A's kinda guys. Miley's contract is fair. Nava is typically an OBP machine. Marrero will never get PT with X/Pedey in front, and the kids at Greenville/Salem behind.
Does Miley/Nava/Marerro for Reddick/Rodriguez(RP) sound right?
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 23, 2015 14:01:00 GMT -5
It kind of feels like a deal with the A's might be in the works... Kelly takes Miley's start yesterday. Nava doesn't start over Nap or Shane vs. a righty. Marrero pulled from the PawSox lineup today. These are all A's kinda guys. Miley's contract is fair. Nava is typically an OBP machine. Marrero will never get PT with X/Pedey in front, and the kids at Greenville/Salem behind. Does Miley/Nava/Marerro for Reddick/Rodriguez(RP) sound right? Kelly didn't "take" Miley's start. He slotted into an opening in the rotation caused by the Monday doubleheader. Marrero was pulled with a minor hamstring injury. Nava has no current trade value. Reddick is a FA after 2016. He will likely be traded at some point. But Rodriguez is a 31YO cost-controlled middle reliever, so I don't see him going anywhere. Miley/Nava/Marrero seems light to me for Reddick. Marrero/Owens+ seems closer.
|
|
|
Post by cheers on Jul 23, 2015 14:06:45 GMT -5
It kind of feels like a deal with the A's might be in the works... Kelly takes Miley's start yesterday. Nava doesn't start over Nap or Shane vs. a righty. Marrero pulled from the PawSox lineup today. These are all A's kinda guys. Miley's contract is fair. Nava is typically an OBP machine. Marrero will never get PT with X/Pedey in front, and the kids at Greenville/Salem behind. Does Miley/Nava/Marerro for Reddick/Rodriguez(RP) sound right? Kelly didn't "take" Miley's start. He slotted into an opening in the rotation caused by the Monday doubleheader. Marrero was pulled with a minor hamstring injury. Nava has no current trade value. Reddick is a FA after 2016. He will likely be traded at some point. But Rodriguez is a 31YO cost-controlled middle reliever, so I don't see him going anywhere. Miley/Nava/Marrero seems light to me for Reddick. Marrero/Owens+ seems closer. Didn't see that Marrero was tweaked. Was treating Nava as a throw-in. Thanks for the clarification.
|
|