Stephen Strasburg for Rick Porcello plus

Well, Margot's probably top-40 or better in postseason lists. That's about the going rate for pitchers with a year to play or less. Throwing in Porcello and paying $28M to do so to get one year of Strasburg seems like a pretty big overpay. Basically, they'd be giving away a #3 who'd cost pretty much what a #3 costs (with salary relief, about $13M a year) who's entering his prime and has four years of control. Or, they're giving away Margot. I still have hope for Strasburg, but less than I did, and I just don't see him doing a 1-year morph into the real deal all while deciding to forgo free agency.

I think this is a trade that neither side would really want to do. We'd be selling low on Porcello, dealing away a very good prospect in Margot (who actually has ranked as a top-30/top-20 guy on midseason prospect lists), and eating money for a rental, and the Nats would be buying a guy who's pitched horribly this year and selling a guy with a ton of name recognition and potential, if nothing else. I think they could get a deal that makes more sense for them if they're going to deal for Strasburg, and if we were going to target him, I'd rather see if we could get him as a free agent, hopefully coming off another down year or something. Even Boras can't convince teams to throw a boatload of cash at a guy who's been hurt and inconsistent for most of his big league career

That's Top of the rotation.

I don't like this trade, but hope the Sox have some out of the box thinkers like greg.

Reports have the Nats wanting to shake things up in the offseason. They have enough talent on the team to compete so I don't think they trade Strasburg for prospects.

Would Buch + a lesser piece for Strasburg and Storen work? They get two years of Buch when Zimmerman and Fister are probably walking and they seem to have grown tired of Strasburg. I don't think they could pay Storen $10+ million to set up either.

Come on guys. We're not getting Strasburg and Storen for Buchholz + junk. There is no way Washington would trade
Strasburg for Buchholz straight up. I want to get out of Porcello's contract. That's why I'd deal him. He never was nor is
going to be a 20m+ pitcher. I don't even care if Strasburg leaves after a year. We'd get a comp pick to replace the prospect we'd have to give up.


I'd try to deal Clay(After picking up his option) to Cubbies for some prospects and flip them for Kimbrell or Chapman.

people are right not getting strasburg and storen for buch and junk but could get them for margot, brian johnson, maybe matt barnes and maybe a couple low a guys like a javiar guerra or a devin marrero.

Exactly. That would be a huge overpay, based on the market (that's arguably more than Price cost the Jays, and Strasburg has nowhere near his performance history), and a waste of talent. Not to mention, Strasburg has a pretty extensive injury history.

Why get rid of Porcello if you're paying $7m a year? They're going to have to pay 10-15m a year for 3-4 years to pick up a #3 to replace him. Judging the guy on one bad year after a very linear progression of improvement strikes me as incredibly short-sighted.

I doubt that Margot becomes the hitter JBJ is.

FYI, there is an "edit" function on posts if you want to go back and change something.

DD values power arms and we need top of the rotation talent but its very unlikely that Boras will want to extend Strasburg before FA SO...... Adding Storen may make some sense. The Nats are also in a possession with lots of FAs and coming off a couple underachieving seasons. How bout Miley/(or)Kelly, Margot, Travis/(or)Shaw and Guerra fro Storen and Strasburgh. The basis to tho is that the Nats may have a lot more interest in Kelly or Miley due to the much lower AAV than Porcello.

I would ink this trade in a heartbeat in washington said yes.

They'd get a comp pick (provided they didn't sign someone else), probably in the 35-40 range. That's a moderate-ceiling/low-risk college player (Brian Johnson, or someone with a little more defensive value than Sam Travis, who went 67(?) because he was a 1b and good but not outstanding hitter) who's at best 2-3 years away, or a high-ceiling/high-risk HSer, who's probably 4-5 years away (Kopech...and remember, Trey Ball was considered "much better" than in this category). Margot is in AA at 20 and projects to be a plus-plus CF who steals bases, and is a year away. Guerra reasonably projects as a plus-plus SS with fringe-average power and probably fringe-average (or average for a SS) overall offense. Both have high ceilings and are arguably lower risk (having both performed well in full-season ball) than anyone the Sox could get outside of the top12 to -15 in the draft. They're much lower risk than a 35-overall pick, and even Guerra is reasonably projected to make MLB as soon as, or faster than, anyone they would draft at that spot.

You would be trading two players (Margot/Johnson) who are reasonably likely to produce 1-3 WAR per season for their six years of control, and a third who has a similar expectation but at higher risk, for one year of a 3-4 WAR pitcher with 5-6 (risky) upside and a draft pick that has a mean career expectation of 1-3 WAR...in 3-5 years. I think they can do **much** better than that. That's giving away roughly 15-30 WAR in talent (or more, over the next six years) for one year of a 6-WAR ceiling player who is probably more likely to produce 4 WAR, and thus only be a 2-3 WAR improvement over the pitcher he replaces...and a player who's more likely to bust than be anything of value, and who's highly unlikely to be of significant value. If they trade Margot/Johnson/Guerra, I would hope it would be for someone with substantially more control time and/or likelihood to be an All-Star level producer in his short Sox tenure. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see them get Strasburg, but definitely not at that cost.