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.
Trade Ideas
|
Post by nonothing on Nov 16, 2017 16:05:48 GMT -5
Roster improvement challenge...
Trade 1:
OAK gets - Brentz (they are looking for RH power bat for OF), Swihart (they don't have good options at C), Barnes (Established MLB potential closer or 8th inning arm - not-arb eligible til 19/FA-22) All-40 man roster players BOS gets - J. Mateo (Just added to 40-man), G. Holmes (not on 40-man)
OAK plays Barreto at 2B as starter, joining Olson and Chapman and Semien. Brentz, Fowler and Joyce in OF with Davis at DH and Swihart helps their C situation given recent news on Maxwell. OAK needs relief help as well, and Barnes would be good addition for them. Rotation of Manaea, Graveman, Blackburn, Cotton, Mengden and Triggs leaves with 6 MLB starters. Barnes w/ Treinen in back of bullpen is better, with Coulombe from left side. Tons of question marks in their pen, but Barnes would be big and cheap addition for them.
If OAK wants to clear Lowrie salary and PT for Barreto and go cheaper on utility, then we take Lowrie and his $6MM deal if we need to (though I prefer to play Hernandez), but if money gets us the players we want from them for our farm, I am for it and they could take Holt if they wanted utility back for less money. You could adjust players around fringes as needed.
For us -- We get 2 very high end prospects who have slid down lists a bit, but still very high ceiling players to help replenish farm (the arm is especially important if we trade Johnson below because we do need starters in pipeline). We do not have enough slots to play all the 25-man roster capable guys we would be trading here. We can definitely put Brentz into 4th OF role, but he is worth more to OAK than to us. Swihart we could use -- but we don't need. Same with Barnes. Good deal for both clubs. Post prospects are worth a lot. We just need to get them to clubs who can use them and who will value them.
Trade 2:
MIA gets - Castillo ($37.8MM/3 yrs), Johnson (out of options), Travis, Marrero (out of options) BOS gets - Stanton ($295MM/10yrs, if no opt out after $77M/3yrs), Bour ($3.5MM arb expected/FA-21), MIA pays $4MM/yr in 21 and 22, then $7MM/yr for 23, 24 and 25, $9MM in 26, $5MM in 27 and they pay the $10MM buyout if we do not use the option to retain Stanton in 2028. All payments ($53MM total) are made only if Stanton does not opt out after 2020. They pay nothing if he does opt out.
Bour surplus value Castillo salary relief another maybe are worth $30-40MM of combined value over 3 yrs. We would be retaining $242MM of the Stanton deal, so offset by about $35MM in other value would be $207MM. Yes, there are a lot of ways to look at this. But this would not be terrible on the financial side. And Miami would not have to be on the hook for any money if he opts out, which gives them positive optionality vs negative optionality and payments are relatively small and deferred into future.
For Miami: Castillo files Stanton hole immediately. Brian Johnson out of options and should be a starter. Would slide into MIA rotation immediately. Sam Travis starts at 1B immediately Marrero out of options is bad for us, but for MIA worth a shot that he finds his bat in change of scenery to hometown team since glove is fantastic at SS or 2B - Riddle didn't hit either for them, and they don't have other top prospects in infield, except at 3B. Also gives another glove to pair with Riddle in case they find somebody to take Dee Gordon and his salary off their hands.
All in, saves Miami a lot of money and provides them with a lot of players who can play right away cheaply and for a long time for them. They can trade Gordon for pitching prospects if they do this and still have Marrero at the minimum instead. They could still be quite good on offense with this lineup, esp if they decide to keep Gordon. He and Castillo could burn up base paths with Yelich and Ozuna, Travis, Anderson and Realmuto hitting behind them. But ultimately, this gives them salary relief and answers to a replacement OF for Stanton and replacement 1B for Bour while giving them a legitimate lefty starter and maybe a great SS or 2B defensively with only upside at the plate. I do not see us giving up Chavis or Mata in a deal like this, as some have suggested we might do. The only way we should trade for Stanton is if we can use our major-league capable pipeline to provide their team with starting players while giving them salary relief to pursue pitching. We don't have a high end farm system to throw in. But if they play these guys -- some of them will work out and they could re-trade them in 1-3 years for more farm-hands. The most I would throw in other than these guys would be Elias, who we are wasting when he used to be a MLB starter and/or Hembree.
We end up with Vazquez, Devers, Bogey, Hernanez/Pedey, Bour for IF; Stanton, Bradley, Betts and Beni for OF and Ramirez to DH - That is 10 starters on offense (not counting Pedey), but somebody will probably always be hurt, or we can rotate through DH/1B/OF slots, always with great offense but more rest for our guys. If they all stay healthy, then we could think about dealing a bat (probably Bradley) at the deadline, when we would probably get more in prospects for them while retaining the injury insurance during the first half of the season. Bench = Leon, Holt, one of guys listed above depending on the day and Hernandez becomes IF sub when Pedey comes back and Lin probably goes back down to AAA.
We get a power RHP in AA in Holmes who could be top of rotation arm, but does not need to be on 40-man now. We add premium athlete in Mateo for SS/2B or CF in a year, as may be needed for any number of reasons. We re-sign Barfield and put on 40-Man roster in AAA - replaces lost Brentz.
If $206MM in salaries is where we would be at before this, we would be right around luxury tax line, assuming we do not take on Lowrie. If we do have to take on Lowrie and/or we sign a lefty reliever (Minor or McGee), we can figure out if we deal Bradley to cut salary and get prospects earlier in season. But we could potentially stay under tax again this year with some minor moves.
Ok, let the stone tossing commence...
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 16, 2017 16:15:53 GMT -5
Roster improvement challenge... Trade 1: OAK gets - Brentz (they are looking for RH power bat for OF), Swihart (they don't have good options at C), Barnes (Established MLB potential closer or 8th inning arm - not-arb eligible til 19/FA-22) All-40 man roster players BOS gets - J. Mateo (Just added to 40-man), G. Holmes (not on 40-man) OAK plays Barreto at 2B as starter, joining Olson and Chapman and Semien. Brentz, Fowler and Joyce in OF with Davis at DH and Swihart helps their C situation given recent news on Maxwell. OAK needs relief help as well, and Barnes would be good addition for them. Rotation of Manaea, Graveman, Blackburn, Cotton, Mengden and Triggs leaves with 6 MLB starters. Barnes w/ Treinen in back of bullpen is better, with Coulombe from left side. Tons of question marks in their pen, but Barnes would be big and cheap addition for them. If OAK wants to clear Lowrie salary and PT for Barreto and go cheaper on utility, then we take Lowrie and his $6MM deal if we need to (though I prefer to play Hernandez), but if money gets us the players we want from them for our farm, I am for it and they could take Holt if they wanted utility back for less money. You could adjust players around fringes as needed. For us -- We get 2 very high end prospects who have slid down lists a bit, but still very high ceiling players to help replenish farm (the arm is especially important if we trade Johnson below because we do need starters in pipeline). We do not have enough slots to play all the 25-man roster capable guys we would be trading here. We can definitely put Brentz into 4th OF role, but he is worth more to OAK than to us. Swihart we could use -- but we don't need. Same with Barnes. Good deal for both clubs. Post prospects are worth a lot. We just need to get them to clubs who can use them and who will value them. Trade 2: MIA gets - Castillo ($37.8MM/3 yrs), Johnson (out of options), Travis, Marrero (out of options) BOS gets - Stanton ($295MM/10yrs, if no opt out after $77M/3yrs), Bour ($3.5MM arb expected/FA-21), MIA pays $4MM/yr in 21 and 22, then $7MM/yr for 23, 24 and 25, $9MM in 26, $5MM in 27 and they pay the $10MM buyout if we do not use the option to retain Stanton in 2028. All payments ($53MM total) are made only if Stanton does not opt out after 2020. They pay nothing if he does opt out. Bour surplus value Castillo salary relief another maybe are worth $30-40MM of combined value over 3 yrs. We would be retaining $242MM of the Stanton deal, so offset by about $35MM in other value would be $207MM. Yes, there are a lot of ways to look at this. But this would not be terrible on the financial side. And Miami would not have to be on the hook for any money if he opts out, which gives them positive optionality vs negative optionality and payments are relatively small and deferred into future. For Miami: Castillo files Stanton hole immediately. Brian Johnson out of options and should be a starter. Would slide into MIA rotation immediately. Sam Travis starts at 1B immediately Marrero out of options is bad for us, but for MIA worth a shot that he finds his bat in change of scenery to hometown team since glove is fantastic at SS or 2B - Riddle didn't hit either for them, and they don't have other top prospects in infield, except at 3B. Also gives another glove to pair with Riddle in case they find somebody to take Dee Gordon and his salary off their hands. All in, saves Miami a lot of money and provides them with a lot of players who can play right away cheaply and for a long time for them. They can trade Gordon for pitching prospects if they do this and still have Marrero at the minimum instead. They could still be quite good on offense with this lineup, esp if they decide to keep Gordon. He and Castillo could burn up base paths with Yelich and Ozuna, Travis, Anderson and Realmuto hitting behind them. But ultimately, this gives them salary relief and answers to a replacement OF for Stanton and replacement 1B for Bour while giving them a legitimate lefty starter and maybe a great SS or 2B defensively with only upside at the plate. I do not see us giving up Chavis or Mata in a deal like this, as some have suggested we might do. The only way we should trade for Stanton is if we can use our major-league capable pipeline to provide their team with starting players while giving them salary relief to pursue pitching. We don't have a high end farm system to throw in. But if they play these guys -- some of them will work out and they could re-trade them in 1-3 years for more farm-hands. The most I would throw in other than these guys would be Elias, who we are wasting when he used to be a MLB starter and/or Hembree. We end up with Vazquez, Devers, Bogey, Hernanez/Pedey, Bour for IF; Stanton, Bradley, Betts and Beni for OF and Ramirez to DH - That is 10 starters on offense (not counting Pedey), but somebody will probably always be hurt, or we can rotate through DH/1B/OF slots, always with great offense but more rest for our guys. If they all stay healthy, then we could think about dealing a bat (probably Bradley) at the deadline, when we would probably get more in prospects for them while retaining the injury insurance during the first half of the season. Bench = Leon, Holt, one of guys listed above depending on the day and Hernandez becomes IF sub when Pedey comes back and Lin probably goes back down to AAA. We get a power RHP in AA in Holmes who could be top of rotation arm, but does not need to be on 40-man now. We add premium athlete in Mateo for SS/2B or CF in a year, as may be needed for any number of reasons. We re-sign Barfield and put on 40-Man roster in AAA - replaces lost Brentz. If $206MM in salaries is where we would be at before this, we would be right around luxury tax line, assuming we do not take on Lowrie. If we do have to take on Lowrie and/or we sign a lefty reliever (Minor or McGee), we can figure out if we deal Bradley to cut salary and get prospects earlier in season. But we could potentially stay under tax again this year with some minor moves. Ok, let the stone tossing commence... I have one initial thought. I think it's a mistake to be right up against the limit as the season begins. Something will happen that, whether it's injuries or underperformance, that would make you want to have money left over for either 7/31 trades or August waiver claims. Especially with the Sox farm system thin, if money can be spent instead of prospects, all the better, but I think you need to leave some space - about $7 to $10 million worth of space. At some point when I get a chance I'll try to look at the rest of the deals other than my initial thoughts of Mateo can't do anything but run and who is G. Holmes - need to look him up!
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 16, 2017 17:30:49 GMT -5
www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=holmes000grawww.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=mateo-000jorI don't get trade one. It might be close to fair value, but it has the Red Sox getting prospects for players that could help them next year. I just don't see why the A's would want to sell low on Holmes. Good arm, but he just had a bad year. The A's would have to love Swihart for that to make sense. I don't see how Brentz has a ton of value and Barnes is what hope he does well so we can flip him down the road type guy? I don't really see why they would want him while rebuilding. I could see a Swihart for Holmes deal making sense. If Sox have no place for him. Sox get a power arm to maybe help in a few years. A's get a former top prospect that can help them now and carries less risk.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Nov 16, 2017 20:13:34 GMT -5
A's have their starting catcher in legal trouble as well. You are exactly on what I am saying with Swihart and Holmes. I think a lot of people love Swihart's bat and would love a shot at a guy like that. Hard to say if you are buying low moreso for Swihart or Holmes, but we need power pitching more than another catcher. Seems good for both clubs to me.
Mateo was considered top prospect at SS on Yankees and is burner/leadoff guy with potential to play multiple positions and would set a bar for Chatham to chase at SS (totally different profile guys and both could fit over time). We are thin on top flight athletes on our farm and have only a to-date injury-riddled potential answer long term at SS, whereas OAK has Mateo wedged in between Barreto and Allen and Merrell and 3 others in top 30 at SS as well and Schrock moving up at 2B also with their corners set for a while. Brentz is exactly what Billy is saying he is looking for publicly = RH power hitting OF. Barnes is insurance of solid return for Mateo if Brentz experiment fails, which I don't think it will actually -- and I think this is probably a better deal for them potentially than for us, except that we have wasting assets we should move for future value. But Barnes definitely fits a guy they use for 2-3 years well and flip for greater value in 2-3 yrs. Frankly, we should probably also want another low minors athlete like Merrell in such a deal for balance.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 16, 2017 20:34:39 GMT -5
I get the Swihart move, trading two guys with low value for each other.
I don't get Mateo. His 60 games at AA were really good, he hit 8 HRs. He looks like a top 50 prospect, at worst a top 75 guy. Barnes is not worth that type of player and like I said Brentz has low trade value. They might have a log jam long-term, but that looks like a bad trade for them and great for us. Mateo was 1 of two key pieces traded for Gray a really good pitcher. They won't move him for anything like that unless he flames out.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Nov 16, 2017 20:48:56 GMT -5
I get the Swihart move, trading two guys with low value for each other. I don't get Mateo. His 60 games at AA were really good, he hit 8 HRs. He looks like a top 50 prospect, at worst a top 75 guy. Barnes is not worth that type of player and like I said Brentz has low trade value. They might have a log jam long-term, but that looks like a bad trade for them and great for us. Mateo was 1 of two key pieces traded for Gray a really good pitcher. They won't move him for anything like that unless he flames out. They got Kaprelian and Fowler along with Mateo, but your point stands. The other guy who commented thought Mateo was not worth much of anything. The question on Mateo is whether he can stick at SS or whether he plays anywhere for the A's with Fowler and Schrock and Barreto also there and others. Mateo is currently not in top 100 prospects (unless I missed his name) or in top 10 SS overall rankings. He slipped. But I agree he has a lot of upside and they could think too good to trade -- but for a shot at 6 yrs of control of a potential masher in Brentz at the league minimum + a potential closer? I don't know. These guys are MLB guys this year. Mateo still a prospect. I think you could argue it either way. They could really win that deal or we could. But they would not get nothing on the Mateo side because Barnes is definitely a contributor unless he gets hurt. Mateo maybe never contributes. Look at Profar. Maybe he is awesome. Maybe Brentz is awesome. Just some ideas. Interested in others people have. Btw, I think the A's can contend for playoff spot this year or next. Just depends how quickly their babies step up. Yankees babies were quick. The A's could be a SP away very soon. If they try to get Ozuna or Yelich -- it will cost a lot more than Brentz, and their bullpen will still stink + they may not have the guys to deal for the SP they will need to put them over the top. Who has other ideas for ways to make use of our surplus AAAA guys?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 16, 2017 22:16:04 GMT -5
If you had to move Brentz that's a good choice. I just think you are overvaluing him. Mateo was on a bunch of top 100 and top 50 lists to start the year in 2017. Look at the link I posted. Then was bad for half a year. Got moved to AA and hit like a beast if he can stay at SS. I don't know enough about him, but if he has a chance to stick at SS he is a top 50 to top 100 in 2018 to start the year. You want a guy like that, it's going to cost you Chavis. Maybe Chavis and Brentz.
No way the A's are a playoff team next year. They don't have the Veterans the Yankees did. I like some of there young players, but it takes time. Unless the A's are going to be big spenders in free agency and that just won't happen. The A's just don't have guys like CC, Chapman, Gardner, Castro, Ellsbury, Headley, etc. They traded their two best hitters in Alonso and Davis (highest OPS+).
Sounds like the Red Sox are maybe planning on using them. DD said Brentz has inside track on 4th OF spot. Gammons is reporting Swihart could fill in at 2B and become a super sub playing OF,C, 3B, 2B and 1B.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 16, 2017 22:46:02 GMT -5
I like trade 1, though like umass I'm not sure it's the type of move they make. It could shake out that way though; I like Mateo a lot, and he has lost some lustre; and I could see the A's projecting Barnes and Swihart and being willing to give up those two. All depends on needs/how they see players, but the rationale is sound.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Nov 17, 2017 0:21:29 GMT -5
I think the Red Sox try to use them if they can't find takers. They are worth too much to just let expire worthless. But I think if they could get future value, they should. Swihart is a problem for us to get good value from in particular with a solid bat, no options and no clear position on the team. Hernandez is a better option at 2B than Swihart. They are clearly just trying to invent ways to get value out of him at this point. Brentz has a clear role on 2018 Sox roster -- it is just a role of less value than he could have on a team willing to give him a full time look. The A's have done well with our castaway/"not good enough" OFs in the past with Moss and Reddick. Fwiw, I like this kind of smaller trade idea with the A's better than the Stanton idea.
If you get Bour also and can dump Castillo' salary, the Stanton deal could be ok. But most likely, it feels bad by 3-5 years in and then you just have a long tail of endless financial sucking sound. Maybe he is worth it -- he really could be -- but almost nobody ever is. He does offer defensive value over Martinez, so it is hard not to argue he is worth more AAV. The problem is just the duration, which I never understand why GMs give out. He could well be the "over the top" guy for us though. So... I wouldn't throw the idea out entirely if they eat enough money and take assets we are not using well or are wasting on our roster that are of more value to them.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Nov 17, 2017 0:31:04 GMT -5
If you had to move Brentz that's a good choice. I just think you are overvaluing him. Mateo was on a bunch of top 100 and top 50 lists to start the year in 2017. Look at the link I posted. Then was bad for half a year. Got moved to AA and hit like a beast if he can stay at SS. I don't know enough about him, but if he has a chance to stick at SS he is a top 50 to top 100 in 2018 to start the year. You want a guy like that, it's going to cost you Chavis. Maybe Chavis and Brentz. No way the A's are a playoff team next year. They don't have the Veterans the Yankees did. I like some of there young players, but it takes time. Unless the A's are going to be big spenders in free agency and that just won't happen. The A's just don't have guys like CC, Chapman, Gardner, Castro, Ellsbury, Headley, etc. They traded their two best hitters in Alonso and Davis (highest OPS+). Sounds like the Red Sox are maybe planning on using them. DD said Brentz has inside track on 4th OF spot. Gammons is reporting Swihart could fill in at 2B and become a super sub playing OF,C, 3B, 2B and 1B. They traded Healy today too btw. I think by end of this season they look good, or they make bigger moves to upgrade the pitching if the offense is going and the pitching is not. They need 3 of their starters to work out. If we don't trade for Stanton, Johnson is also a good fit for them. They did pretty well with Zito throwing curveballs for them. So is Hembree. We have a lot of guys who won't make much who should be on other teams this year. We should deal them and get some value lower down on the farm. If we buy a primary lefty out of the pen -- what do we do with Scott, Beeks and Johnson? So we need to move some guys if we want to do any "upgrading" of certain spots.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2018 10:03:28 GMT -5
If the Sox are planning to dump Hanley's contract they would need to eat at least 16m. And then pull a trade like the Dodgers, Royals and White Sox did where there were salary dumps and were able to get productive players back. Here's an idea.
Sox would use players like Swihart Brentz Hembree Travis R.Elias Martin Castillo Ball Requena Johnson Wright and Leon
Marlins get Leon Castillo White Sox get Prado Hembree Requena and Swihart
Royals get Johnson Travis
Orioles get Wright Shawaryn
A's get Hanley and Brentz
Padres get Ball
Red Sox get Garrett Cooper 1b Miami and 2m cash Zack Collins c WS 2m Royals Mark Trumbo DH Orioles 1m Liam Hendrick rhp Nick Allen 2b A's Jeisson Rosario OF AND 3m (for withholding information on Pom trade) Sox have saved 7m on Hanley's contract. You have Trumbo won't need JDM 22m saved. Use that 29m on Lynn or Cobb and Addison Reed. You have Hendrick and Velazquez for depth Collins is a catcher with upside/options and bats left . Cooper Allen and Rosario good prospects to develop.
|
|
|
Post by cotuitfan on Jan 10, 2018 11:54:25 GMT -5
Cole to Astros - details TK
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2018 12:04:26 GMT -5
Cole to Astros - details TK Morosi and Rosenthal reporting trade is imminent.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 10, 2018 13:56:42 GMT -5
If the Sox are planning to dump Hanley's contract they would need to eat at least 16m. And then pull a trade like the Dodgers, Royals and White Sox did where there were salary dumps and were able to get productive players back. Here's an idea. Sox would use players like Swihart Brentz Hembree Travis R.Elias Martin Castillo Ball Requena Johnson Wright and Leon Marlins get Leon Castillo White Sox get Prado Hembree Requena and Swihart Royals get Johnson Travis Orioles get Wright Shawaryn A's get Hanley and Brentz Padres get Ball Red Sox get Garrett Cooper 1b Miami and 2m cash Zack Collins c WS 2m Royals Mark Trumbo DH Orioles 1m Liam Hendrick rhp Nick Allen 2b A's Jeisson Rosario OF AND 3m (for withholding information on Pom trade) Sox have saved 7m on Hanley's contract. You have Trumbo won't need JDM 22m saved. Use that 29m on Lynn or Cobb and Addison Reed. You have Hendrick and Velazquez for depth Collins is a catcher with upside/options and bats left . Cooper Allen and Rosario good prospects to develop. I've been a baseball fan for 38 years. I've never seen a trade involve more than 4 teams at a time and even then it was complicated. The last one I actually remember was the Nomar deal in which the Sox, Cubs, Twins, and Expos were involved and it was so confusing the Twins actually were owed a player and somehow didn't get that player. Your trade scenario involves seven, eight teams (I lost count)? It's very hard to get 2 GMs to agree on value, but to get at least a half a dozen to has absolutely no basis in reality.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 10, 2018 13:57:12 GMT -5
Cole to Astros - details TK Morosi and Rosenthal reporting trade is imminent. For at least the moment, Jeff Luhnow disagrees that a deal is imminent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2018 14:36:31 GMT -5
If the Sox are planning to dump Hanley's contract they would need to eat at least 16m. And then pull a trade like the Dodgers, Royals and White Sox did where there were salary dumps and were able to get productive players back. Here's an idea. Sox would use players like Swihart Brentz Hembree Travis R.Elias Martin Castillo Ball Requena Johnson Wright and Leon Marlins get Leon Castillo White Sox get Prado Hembree Requena and Swihart Royals get Johnson Travis Orioles get Wright Shawaryn A's get Hanley and Brentz Padres get Ball Red Sox get Garrett Cooper 1b Miami and 2m cash Zack Collins c WS 2m Royals Mark Trumbo DH Orioles 1m Liam Hendrick rhp Nick Allen 2b A's Jeisson Rosario OF AND 3m (for withholding information on Pom trade) Sox have saved 7m on Hanley's contract. You have Trumbo won't need JDM 22m saved. Use that 29m on Lynn or Cobb and Addison Reed. You have Hendrick and Velazquez for depth Collins is a catcher with upside/options and bats left . Cooper Allen and Rosario good prospects to develop. I've been a baseball fan for 38 years. I've never seen a trade involve more than 4 teams at a time and even then it was complicated. The last one I actually remember was the Nomar deal in which the Sox, Cubs, Twins, and Expos were involved and it was so confusing the Twins actually were owed a player and somehow didn't get that player. Your trade scenario involves seven, eight teams (I lost count)? It's very hard to get 2 GMs to agree on value, but to get at least a half a dozen to has absolutely no basis in reality. LOL. 6 teams 19 players 7m dollars . You're probably right. But when the owners/agents/cba and Boras to start signing the 131 free agents and trading for available players. It could be crazier than this. I hope.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 12:07:20 GMT -5
Just read that JDM will hold out until spring training or past. Machado is a great player but unlikely to resign with the Sox. Still going to use the Orioles to make the Sox better. Don't care about Dan Duquette or Peter Angelos rejecting this trade. It's going to get done. Here it is.
Orioles get Porcello Sox eat 11m of is contract Groome Wright Shawaryn Raudes and/or Cedrola
Red Sox get Trey Mancini DH Mychal Givens RHR Michael Baumann RHP Chance Sisco C So the Sox give up their no.1 for the Orioles no.1 Groome/Sisco Givens has 3 very good years. Throws 95-96 with funky arm slot Baumann is a lottery ticket.
Trey Mancini's 2017 stats 24hr 78rbi .293ba .338obp All of these players are controlled to the 2022/2023 seasons. Sisco to is a LH hitting catcher who would compliment CV. Givens could be the 8th inning guy
And we saved $$$ on not signing JDM . So now I'm going to Lynn AND Cobb. And win the World Series.
|
|
|
Post by thankumrboggs on Jan 11, 2018 13:51:55 GMT -5
Does a trade for Jason Kipnis make sense? He can be a full time 2B until Pedy comes back and then he can play DH, 1B and 2B.
We could give them a small time prospect say Brian Johnson and Roniel Raudes..or something but eat most of the salary.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 14:49:08 GMT -5
Does a trade for Jason Kipnis make sense? He can be a full time 2B until Pedy comes back and then he can play DH, 1B and 2B. We could give them a small time prospect say Brian Johnson and Roniel Raudes..or something but eat most of the salary. Sure. May have bump up the prospects value to say Travis and Raudes or better so the Indians eat more of his contract. Kipnis is due 13.5m in'18 14.5 in '19 and 16.5 in '20. But heck. It ain't our money.
|
|
|
Post by p23w on Jan 11, 2018 21:17:01 GMT -5
There is no way the Orioles part with both Mancini and Cisco. Why would the RS give up a proven RHSP good for 200 IP? Lynn, you loose a draft pick. Cobb you probably don't get 200 IP but you can expect a higher AAV than Porcello is paid. I'd just as soon forget the trade ... and Lynn, and sign Cobb.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 23:56:46 GMT -5
There is no way the Orioles part with both Mancini and Cisco. Why would the RS give up a proven RHSP good for 200 IP? Lynn, you loose a draft pick. Cobb you probably don't get 200 IP but you can expect a higher AAV than Porcello is paid. I'd just as soon forget the trade ... and Lynn, and sign Cobb. Remember this is a sub-forum thread. More like fantasy trades that are unlikely to happen. Here are few things I found out. Cobb received a qualifying offer so there's a pick attached to him too. Porcello gave up 38hr 238 hits. Cobb and Lynn combined gave up 35hr. If you had a choice between signing JDM for 25m a year for 5 years or making a trade for a player like Mancini with 5years of control starting at league minimum in 2018. Would you do it ? Show me what a good trade looks like. And have fun doing it.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 12, 2018 0:32:50 GMT -5
There is no way the Orioles part with both Mancini and Cisco. Why would the RS give up a proven RHSP good for 200 IP? Lynn, you loose a draft pick. Cobb you probably don't get 200 IP but you can expect a higher AAV than Porcello is paid. I'd just as soon forget the trade ... and Lynn, and sign Cobb. Remember this is a sub-forum thread. More like fantasy trades that are unlikely to happen. Here are few things I found out. Cobb received a qualifying offer so there's a pick attached to him too. Porcello gave up 38hr 238 hits. Cobb and Lynn combined gave up 35hr. If you had a choice between signing JDM for 25m a year for 5 years or making a trade for a player like Mancini with 5years of control starting at league minimum in 2018. Would you do it ? Show me what a good trade looks like. And have fun doing it. Actually this sub-forum is meant for realistic proposals - such as according to rumors Player X is available. I'd like the Red Sox to give up Y and Z for player X, and no we're not talking Marrero and Sandy Leon for Machado type of proposals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2018 8:37:35 GMT -5
Remember this is a sub-forum thread. More like fantasy trades that are unlikely to happen. Here are few things I found out. Cobb received a qualifying offer so there's a pick attached to him too. Porcello gave up 38hr 238 hits. Cobb and Lynn combined gave up 35hr. If you had a choice between signing JDM for 25m a year for 5 years or making a trade for a player like Mancini with 5years of control starting at league minimum in 2018. Would you do it ? Show me what a good trade looks like. And have fun doing it. Actually this sub-forum is meant for realistic proposals - such as according to rumors Player X is available. I'd like the Red Sox to give up Y and Z for player X, and no we're not talking Marrero and Sandy Leon for Machado type of proposals. Show me.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 12, 2018 9:24:11 GMT -5
Actually this sub-forum is meant for realistic proposals - such as according to rumors Player X is available. I'd like the Red Sox to give up Y and Z for player X, and no we're not talking Marrero and Sandy Leon for Machado type of proposals. Show me. Show you what? I'm not a mod, and I could be mistaken, but I didn't think the purpose of this place was to make up Deven Marrero for Mike Trout fantasies or make 20 player 10 team deals that have less than 0 chance of happening, but what do I know? Carry on.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 12, 2018 9:48:58 GMT -5
If you think a trade proposal is unrealistic, the route to go is to explain why you think it is unrealistic. This one is admittedly out there, but we’re generally not going to shut down proposals made in good faith. Thanks.
|
|
|