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 jmei on Jul 26, 2015 10:33:33 GMT -5
I've seen some rumors the Nats are interested in Zobriest and even Chapman. Both would be expensive but maybe a Holt/Koji deal would be cheaper. Imagine if the Sox could get Giolito for that pair. Holt has four more years of control and Koji 1.5. Each alone could probably fetch a 40-60 range prospect...could both together (with their favorable contract situations) net a top-10? No.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 26, 2015 10:34:29 GMT -5
I've seen some rumors the Nats are interested in Zobriest and even Chapman. Both would be expensive but maybe a Holt/Koji deal would be cheaper. Imagine if the Sox could get Giolito for that pair. Holt has four more years of control and Koji 1.5. Each alone could probably fetch a 40-60 range prospect...could both together (with their favorable contract situations) net a top-10? No, no, no. I've said it before and I'll say it again. You don't get to trade dimes (usually I use nickels) for quarters.
|
|
|
Brock Holt
Jul 26, 2015 10:34:34 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by telson13 on Jul 26, 2015 10:34:34 GMT -5
I just used Marrero as an example. Perhaps there would be more interest in Tazawa, given his age and contract. I'm a huge fan of Glasnow and am just trying to throw out ideas to see if there could be a potential trade. I'd be willing to throw in Margot or Guerra if we got something decent back from the Pirates in addition to Glasnow. I think that Neal Huntington is a lot easier to talk to than many of the other GMs. I am also a big fan of Glasnow, but he (plus another piece) will cost BOS Betts or Bogaerts. Don't think they'd be all that interested in Swihart, and I don't really see another fit. Ergo, I don't see a possible, realistic trade involving Glasnow. Taillon might be a more realistic target, post-TJ.
|
|
|
Brock Holt
Jul 26, 2015 10:39:10 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by telson13 on Jul 26, 2015 10:39:10 GMT -5
Imagine if the Sox could get Giolito for that pair. Holt has four more years of control and Koji 1.5. Each alone could probably fetch a 40-60 range prospect...could both together (with their favorable contract situations) net a top-10? No, no, no. I've said it before and I'll say it again. You don't get to trade dimes (usually I use nickels) for quarters. Depends on the team and their desire to win now. The Nats have gone all-in after coming up short several years in a row with huge expectations. They still have to get by the Cards and Dodgers, which they've been unable to do. I'm not saying it's likely, but it's certainly not unheard-of. Zimmerman and Strasburg's 2015/2016 FA probably means no, but teams absolutely trade quarters for dimes. See Martinez for Pavano/Armas Jr. It all centers on perceived need, and it never hurts to ask.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 26, 2015 10:45:16 GMT -5
No, no, no. I've said it before and I'll say it again. You don't get to trade dimes (usually I use nickels) for quarters. Depends on the team and their desire to win now. The Nats have gone all-in after coming up short several years in a row with huge expectations. They still have to get by the Cards and Dodgers, which they've been unable to do. I'm not saying it's likely, but it's certainly not unheard-of. Zimmerman and Strasburg's 2015/2016 FA probably means no, but teams absolutely trade quarters for dimes. See Martinez for Pavano/Armas Jr. It all centers on perceived need, and it never hurts to ask. They're not surrendering Giolito for Holt and Uehara. They could go after guys like Papelbon or Hill and not have to surrender Giolito. Then they'd be trading dimes for dimes instead of giving up a ridiculous amount for immediate short-term help. The Nats didn't become good by making stupid deals like that.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 26, 2015 11:22:30 GMT -5
Depends on the team and their desire to win now. The Nats have gone all-in after coming up short several years in a row with huge expectations. They still have to get by the Cards and Dodgers, which they've been unable to do. I'm not saying it's likely, but it's certainly not unheard-of. Zimmerman and Strasburg's 2015/2016 FA probably means no, but teams absolutely trade quarters for dimes. See Martinez for Pavano/Armas Jr. It all centers on perceived need, and it never hurts to ask. It never hurts to ask, but using historical outliers as justification for your position is a terrible way to gain credibility. Every deal is not Bagwell-for-Andersen, Smoltz-for-Alexander or Pedro-for-Armas/Pavano. We are trying to have serious discussion on trade deadline matters. So, trading Holt and Koji (separately) for top 40-60 prospects is realistic. Trading two 40-60 prospect equivalents for a top 10 prospect is not realistic. A top 10 prospect is highly prized and not easily traded.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 26, 2015 11:25:09 GMT -5
The Nats have too much uncertaintyin thier rotation these next few years to trade him or Ross.
|
|
|
Brock Holt
Jul 26, 2015 12:40:03 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by telson13 on Jul 26, 2015 12:40:03 GMT -5
Depends on the team and their desire to win now. The Nats have gone all-in after coming up short several years in a row with huge expectations. They still have to get by the Cards and Dodgers, which they've been unable to do. I'm not saying it's likely, but it's certainly not unheard-of. Zimmerman and Strasburg's 2015/2016 FA probably means no, but teams absolutely trade quarters for dimes. See Martinez for Pavano/Armas Jr. It all centers on perceived need, and it never hurts to ask. It never hurts to ask, but using historical outliers as justification for your position is a terrible way to gain credibility. Every deal is not Bagwell-for-Andersen, Smoltz-for-Alexander or Pedro-for-Armas/Pavano. We are trying to have serious discussion on trade deadline matters. So, trading Holt and Koji (separately) for top 40-60 prospects is realistic. Trading two 40-60 prospect equivalents for a top 10 prospect is not realistic. A top 10 prospect is highly prized and not easily traded. If you want "realistic" discussion, how about acknowledging that the Sox including a high-upside minor leaguer like Margot or maybe even Guerra (with Desmond likely leaving) makes that sort of deal more likely? You dismiss the idea out of hand while calling "historical outliers" "unrealistic," despite the fact that, historical as they are, they happened and thus, are by nature, realistic. Do I have to be so careful with my wording as to make sure I say "who would you be willing to trade along with Holt and Uehara to get Giolito?" As far as I'm concerned, the purpose of discussion is to discuss, not force the commentary into the mold of your opinion. I'm done with this topic.
|
|
|
Brock Holt
Jul 26, 2015 12:55:32 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by jmei on Jul 26, 2015 12:55:32 GMT -5
Chill out, dude. No need to freak out every time someone disagrees with you.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 26, 2015 13:13:34 GMT -5
I will take two top 40-60 prospects for Uehara and Holt any day of the week.
|
|
|
Post by dridiot on Jul 26, 2015 13:15:12 GMT -5
It never hurts to ask, but using historical outliers as justification for your position is a terrible way to gain credibility. Every deal is not Bagwell-for-Andersen, Smoltz-for-Alexander or Pedro-for-Armas/Pavano. We are trying to have serious discussion on trade deadline matters. So, trading Holt and Koji (separately) for top 40-60 prospects is realistic. Trading two 40-60 prospect equivalents for a top 10 prospect is not realistic. A top 10 prospect is highly prized and not easily traded. If you want "realistic" discussion, how about acknowledging that the Sox including a high-upside minor leaguer like Margot or maybe even Guerra (with Desmond likely leaving) makes that sort of deal more likely? You dismiss the idea out of hand while calling "historical outliers" "unrealistic," despite the fact that, historical as they are, they happened and thus, are by nature, realistic. Do I have to be so careful with my wording as to make sure I say "who would you be willing to trade along with Holt and Uehara to get Giolito?" As far as I'm concerned, the purpose of discussion is to discuss, not force the commentary into the mold of your opinion. I'm done with this topic. It's not comparable because Pedro only had a year left on his contract. Unless you're saying Pedro is the dime and Pavano the quarter....? At any rate, he's just saying, just because someone made a lopsided trade before, doesn't mean we should expect trades to be lopsided in our favor in general. It's a sure way to set yourself up for disappointment. For the sake of discussion, we're just trying to figure out what we can probably get for Holt. Of course, we'd love to get Bryce Harper, but there that discussion isn't really going anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 26, 2015 13:28:51 GMT -5
You want a best case type of trade for Holt? Look no further then the Andrew Miller trade last year. It wouldn't be the slam dunk that trade was because Holt is under team control for years, while Miller was a to be free agent.
Also I have to say that it is unrealistic to think any team will trade away a top 10 prospect at this time in baseball. They are worth their wait in gold.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Jul 26, 2015 14:05:42 GMT -5
If a team was willing to a top 10 prospect, they know for a fact they could do a lot better than Holt or Koji.
If one of those guys could bring back a prospect in the 60-100 range, then I'd be very happy and pleased. If the Sox traded Holt and Koji and got a blue chip prospect in return I'd be very pleased but I'd also expect a breaking news story to come out about a sox front office personal holding another teams G.M. at gun point.
|
|
|
Brock Holt
Jul 26, 2015 17:30:35 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by telson13 on Jul 26, 2015 17:30:35 GMT -5
Chill out, dude. No need to freak out every time someone disagrees with you. Hahaha! Wow, OK. I'll drop the straight razors, turn off the Pink Floyd, and empty the warm bathwater.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 26, 2015 17:32:05 GMT -5
Chill out, dude. No need to freak out every time someone disagrees with you. Hahaha! Wow, OK. I'll drop the straight razors, turn off the Pink Floyd, and empty the warm bathwater. To be fair, straight razor shaves are awesome, Pink Floyd is great, and I'm a sucker for a warm bath.
|
|
|
Brock Holt
Jul 26, 2015 17:41:42 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by telson13 on Jul 26, 2015 17:41:42 GMT -5
Hahaha! Wow, OK. I'll drop the straight razors, turn off the Pink Floyd, and empty the warm bathwater. To be fair, straight razor shaves are awesome, Pink Floyd is great, and I'm a sucker for a warm bath. All very true...but the combo is ominous.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 30, 2015 2:34:14 GMT -5
Do you think the Mets would trade Zack Wheeler for Brock Holt?
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 30, 2015 7:13:31 GMT -5
No.
|
|
|