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 dmaineah on Jul 5, 2016 11:45:22 GMT -5
Are the Washington Nationals all in this year?
Could Lucas Giolito be available for the right Player(s) to get them to a World Series?
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Jul 5, 2016 12:02:36 GMT -5
Which "right Player(s)" would you suggest? What are the Nats biggest needs? SP doesn't seem to be a need, though there is little Boston can do to help. Papelbon is back off the DL which should boost the BP. Could they use a Hanigan? Wolson Ramos is having a great year. His backup, Lobaton has played sparingly and with little success with the bat.
No doubt there will be other teams offering help.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Jul 5, 2016 12:10:05 GMT -5
I'm thinking BLOCBUSTER
Something like; Price & Bradley for Giolito, Turner, Lopez & Voth
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 5, 2016 12:20:30 GMT -5
My initial thought is to write this off entirely, but let's entertain the idea. The Nationals biggest weaknesses are center field and first base. There's no matchup for a first baseman - the Nats aren't giving up on one of the two best pitching prospects in the game for an upgrade only to Hanley Ramirez or Travis Shaw. Center field, though? The Red Sox have real depth there. The Nats would obviously ask Betts. I wouldn't take that risk, though Giolito is one of the few players that even asking is unreasonable. But no, I don't think the Sox do that.
So we're left with building a package around Bradley. Bradley, a tier one prospect, a tier two prospect, and a wild card project would seem fair. Trading Bradley along with Benintendi for Moncada would turn a position of organizational strength into a weakness, so that doesn't make a ton of sense. That leaves Espinoza as the obvious option for both teams. Travis makes sense as the tier two guy, but they might want to see if the medicals work out - maybe as a PTBNL until he passes an offseason physical. From there, you'd probably throw in one of the Lowell arms as a sweetner. So yeah, we're probably looking at Bradley, Espinoza, Darwinzon Hernandez and PTBNL (Travis).
That helps the Nationals, a WS contender fill a major hole in both the long and short term, while also keeping their farm system well stocked. The Red Sox trade from a position of depth - Betts moves back to center, Benintendi in right, Moncada in left by mid-'17, and also pick up a great young arm with real potential to front a rotation within two years.
I'm pretty sure the Nats wouldn't do it - especially now that Giolito is in the majors - but unlike many of the "let's trade for a young ace!" ideas, there's at least something of an organizational match-up here.
|
|
ematz1423
Veteran
Posts: 5,154
Member is Online
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jul 5, 2016 12:23:29 GMT -5
I'm thinking BLOCBUSTERSomething like; Price & Bradley for Giolito, Turner, Lopez & Voth I can't see the Nats having any interest in Price unless the Sox pay half of his contract. Starting next year they would be paying Scherzer 22 million, Strasburg 25 million and Price 30 million. Their payroll currently is roughly 160 million, unless they skyrocketed past that amount or the Sox paid a ridiculous amount of the Price contract they would be tying up close to half of their payroll on 3 pitchers. That is also without taking into account the fact that Harper is going to be a free agent soon and they will need flexibility to at least try and resign him.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Jul 5, 2016 12:30:27 GMT -5
I'm thinking BLOCBUSTERSomething like; Price & Bradley for Giolito, Turner, Lopez & Voth I can't see the Nats having any interest in Price unless the Sox pay half of his contract. Starting next year they would be paying Scherzer 22 million, Strasburg 25 million and Price 30 million. Their payroll currently is roughly 160 million, unless they skyrocketed past that amount or the Sox paid a ridiculous amount of the Price contract they would be tying up close to half of their payroll on 3 pitchers. That is also without taking into account the fact that Harper is going to be a free agent soon and they will need flexibility to at least try and resign him. Not happening They would trade Price in the offseason (or Scherzer or Strasburg)
|
|
ematz1423
Veteran
Posts: 5,154
Member is Online
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jul 5, 2016 12:55:09 GMT -5
I can't see the Nats having any interest in Price unless the Sox pay half of his contract. Starting next year they would be paying Scherzer 22 million, Strasburg 25 million and Price 30 million. Their payroll currently is roughly 160 million, unless they skyrocketed past that amount or the Sox paid a ridiculous amount of the Price contract they would be tying up close to half of their payroll on 3 pitchers. That is also without taking into account the fact that Harper is going to be a free agent soon and they will need flexibility to at least try and resign him. Not happening They would trade Price in the offseason (or Scherzer or Strasburg) Can't see the Nats wanting to trade a good chunk of their farm system for Price and Bradley to turn around and trade Price in the offseason for a likely lesser package than they traded a few months prior.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Jul 5, 2016 13:03:16 GMT -5
Not happening They would trade Price in the offseason (or Scherzer or Strasburg) Can't see the Nats wanting to trade a good chunk of their farm system for Price and Bradley to turn around and trade Price in the offseason for a likely lesser package than they traded a few months prior. Because Price & Bradley could help them win a World Series. Then they could trade Price for what I'm sure would be a very nice return & still have Bradley.
|
|
ematz1423
Veteran
Posts: 5,154
Member is Online
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jul 5, 2016 13:08:30 GMT -5
Can't see the Nats wanting to trade a good chunk of their farm system for Price and Bradley to turn around and trade Price in the offseason for a likely lesser package than they traded a few months prior. Because Price & Bradley could help them win a World Series. Then they could trade Price for what I'm sure would be a very nice return & still have Bradley. It is an interesting idea but we will have to agree to disagree on what they would get for Price in a trade. I don't see too many teams lining up to trade for Price and his albatross of a contract. There are only a handful of teams that could even fit a contract like that in their budget.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,437
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 6, 2016 8:49:16 GMT -5
They might lose Strasburg, so naturally they'd be willing to trade a potential ace who has just began his service time.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 6, 2016 8:51:45 GMT -5
They re-signed Strasburg to a long-term extension this past offseason.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,437
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 6, 2016 8:55:18 GMT -5
Woosh, I forgot about that. Giolito here we come.
If they really want to win now, you could try something like Porcello + Devers for Giolito + Lopez. Or Wright if they believe in him long term. Trading a knuckleball all star worked extremely well for the Mets.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 6, 2016 10:32:50 GMT -5
My initial thought is to write this off entirely, but let's entertain the idea. The Nationals biggest weaknesses are center field and first base. There's no matchup for a first baseman - the Nats aren't giving up on one of the two best pitching prospects in the game for an upgrade only to Hanley Ramirez or Travis Shaw. Center field, though? The Red Sox have real depth there. The Nats would obviously ask Betts. I wouldn't take that risk, though Giolito is one of the few players that even asking is unreasonable. But no, I don't think the Sox do that. So we're left with building a package around Bradley. Bradley, a tier one prospect, a tier two prospect, and a wild card project would seem fair. Trading Bradley along with Benintendi for Moncada would turn a position of organizational strength into a weakness, so that doesn't make a ton of sense. That leaves Espinoza as the obvious option for both teams. Travis makes sense as the tier two guy, but they might want to see if the medicals work out - maybe as a PTBNL until he passes an offseason physical. From there, you'd probably throw in one of the Lowell arms as a sweetner. So yeah, we're probably looking at Bradley, Espinoza, Darwinzon Hernandez and PTBNL (Travis). That helps the Nationals, a WS contender fill a major hole in both the long and short term, while also keeping their farm system well stocked. The Red Sox trade from a position of depth - Betts moves back to center, Benintendi in right, Moncada in left by mid-'17, and also pick up a great young arm with real potential to front a rotation within two years. I'm pretty sure the Nats wouldn't do it - especially now that Giolito is in the majors - but unlike many of the "let's trade for a young ace!" ideas, there's at least something of an organizational match-up here. This makes no sense. You're trading an All-Star, 5-win or so CF, a premium pitching prospect who's probably two years behind Giolito, a borderline first-division 3b, and another prospect for...a pitching prospect. With a TJ history. And essentially no MLB experience. That package might be worth trading for a starter with a glorious track record. But there's no way I gamble all of that on a totally unproven SP with an injury history. Stephen Strasburg, Ben McDonald, Dylan Bundy, Mark Prior, and Kerry Wood should all be sufficient warning as to why it's a terrible idea. Right now, Giolito has tons of potential, name recognition, and injury risk. That's not a compelling combo for me, not at that price. Edit: oops, you said Travis, not Shaw. So it's basically Espinoza-Bradley for Giolito. No thanks, still. Bradley looks to be worth what Giolito *might* be, all by himself. And that's before taking into account that trading position players for pitchers isn't a great idea to begin with, particularly those with injury histories.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 6, 2016 10:45:03 GMT -5
Can't see the Nats wanting to trade a good chunk of their farm system for Price and Bradley to turn around and trade Price in the offseason for a likely lesser package than they traded a few months prior. Because Price & Bradley could help them win a World Series. Then they could trade Price for what I'm sure would be a very nice return & still have Bradley. You realize that any team could've ponied up $219M and had Price **without giving up anything**, right? Why on earth would you think the Nats could get anything significant back for him in trade, **especially when he can opt out in two years**?! If a team wanted to drop $31M a year on him for 6 years, they would have. The Cards offered something like 7/180. So that should tell you the *ceiling* of what anyone else would pay. And that's before giving up prospects. Maybe (maybe) they could get something back if he finished out the year like RJ did in Houston or Doyle Alexander did in Detroit. And if his FB velocity went back to sitting 94+ instead of 92+. But otherwise, the idea is total fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Jul 6, 2016 10:48:53 GMT -5
Can't see the Nats wanting to trade a good chunk of their farm system for Price and Bradley to turn around and trade Price in the offseason for a likely lesser package than they traded a few months prior. Because Price & Bradley could help them win a World Series. Then they could trade Price for what I'm sure would be a very nice return & still have Bradley. The Red Sox gave David Price $31 million per for long term. No one outbid them. Are you saying now, with Price's results so far this season, that his value has not diminished?
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 6, 2016 11:10:48 GMT -5
Edit: oops, you said Travis, not Shaw. So it's basically Espinoza-Bradley for Giolito. No thanks, still. Bradley looks to be worth what Giolito *might* be, all by himself. And that's before taking into account that trading position players for pitchers isn't a great idea to begin with, particularly those with injury histories. "Might be worth" is relative, though, in this case. I'm not worried about value over replacement level, just value over actual available replacements. The Red Sox have a good chance to match Bradley's overall package with in-system options: an outfield of Moncada-Betts-Benintendi projects somehwere near as well as one with any two of those players plus Bradley. They don't have anyone likely to be as good as Giolito - Espinoza might have similar upside (I wouldn't say so, but we're easily within agree-to-disagree range there), but he's a much higher risk. Giolito would be the Red Sox fourth-best starter right now. And I'm not saying I'd do the deal either - just that this is the shape of the kind of deal you'd need to put together to get Giolito. That's the reason why prospects like Giolito are so rarely traded - they are worth a ton, and the risk of trading enough to get someone like that is quite high. The Nationals aren't trading Giolito unless it increases their chances to win in the near-term. The only Red Sox players they really *need* that would fulfill that are Betts or Bradley. Even Bogaerts, who is incredible and I think will win MVP awards, probably isn't worth enough of an upgrade to them to part with Giolito.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 6, 2016 11:19:44 GMT -5
Edit: oops, you said Travis, not Shaw. So it's basically Espinoza-Bradley for Giolito. No thanks, still. Bradley looks to be worth what Giolito *might* be, all by himself. And that's before taking into account that trading position players for pitchers isn't a great idea to begin with, particularly those with injury histories. "Might be worth" is relative, though, in this case. I'm not worried about value over replacement level, just value over actual available replacements. The Red Sox have a good chance to match Bradley's overall package with in-system options: an outfield of Moncada-Betts-Benintendi projects somehwere near as well as one with any two of those players plus Bradley. They don't have anyone likely to be as good as Giolito - Espinoza might have similar upside (I wouldn't say so, but we're easily within agree-to-disagree range there), but he's a much higher risk. Giolito would be the Red Sox fourth-best starter right now. And I'm not saying I'd do the deal either - just that this is the shape of the kind of deal you'd need to put together to get Giolito. That's the reason why prospects like Giolito are so rarely traded - they are worth a ton, and the risk of trading enough to get someone like that is quite high. The Nationals aren't trading Giolito unless it increases their chances to win in the near-term. The only Red Sox players they really *need* that would fulfill that are Betts or Bradley. Even Bogaerts, who is incredible and I think will win MVP awards, probably isn't worth enough of an upgrade to them to part with Giolito. Fair enough...your rationale is sound, certainly. I just don't like the risk involved. I guess I see the requisite move of Moncada as simply creating a hole in the INF, when the time comes. Then again, maybe Devers fills it. And you're right, Im probably higher on Espinoza, who's had moderate success in low A at an age when Giolito was rehabbing his right arm.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 6, 2016 12:03:57 GMT -5
I think they are looking at Sherzer, Strasburg, Giolito and Ross being their answer to the Mets rotation going forward. I think they would listen on Gio Gonzelez but not sure how we would match up in an in season trade.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Jul 6, 2016 13:40:42 GMT -5
I think they are looking at Sherzer, Strasburg, Giolito and Ross being their answer to the Mets rotation going forward. I think they would listen on Gio Gonzelez but not sure how we would match up in an in season trade. I would think they would make Tanner Roark available if not Gio. Depends on who they prefer to keep. Having a solid 6 man rotation is too much of a luxury. I would imagine they could fill another hole. In this market Gio or Roark would require a substantial return. Andrew Miller maybe.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jul 30, 2016 14:20:37 GMT -5
While giolito is likely staying put, I wonder if we could entice them to part with fedde.
|
|
|