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 grandsalami on Dec 10, 2017 16:41:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 10, 2017 18:05:20 GMT -5
It might be time to call the Marlins and ask exactly who else they'll deal in order to move some of their bad contracts. I can't imagine who they'd part with in order to get rid of the Chen contract.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 10, 2017 22:00:54 GMT -5
Wow. You act like the Marlins turned down a better offer. They wanted to trade him to Giants or Cardinals, Stanton said no. The Giants final offer didn't include Panik if they weren't getting Gordon. Castro averages 1.7 bwar and is coming off of a 2 war season and the 2nd base market is very weak. They should have little problem moving him. At his age I bet he gets over 22 million if he were a free agent. I get being upset, but the Marlins took the best deal, because it was the only one that Stanton would approve. This wasn't some sneaky deal were the Marlins accepted a worst offer just to help Jeters former team. It's called a full no trade clause. Does the deal have to be made though? I mean "best" doesn't automatically mean "good". They cut just $11M in payroll by trading Stanton for Castro. Think about that (although I suspect they'll trade him for prospects). They could have cut the same amount by trading Marcel Ozuna's last two years of control for a nice prospect package, including a young 2B. I argued in the Stanton trade thread that the Marlins should wait a year to trade him, because they could deal him to losers for Harper. You very likely get more for him in a year than you would now, from one of the same four teams (the others being the Dodgers, Cubs or Astros). What happened here is that the Yankees told the Marlins that they could only do the trade for Castro and with $30M coming their way to offset the salary. And they offered almost nothing else in the way of prospects. I was too harsh on Castro, forgetting that he had a very good age 27 season and probably has some surplus value. The prospects they can get for Castro, plus the ones they got, don't come anywhere close to what the Giants were reportedly offering (their top four). Or look at it this way. They just paid $30M for Starlin Castro's excess value, which is $10M at most. The Marlins needed a backup plan to slash payroll if there was no acceptable offer for Stanton, which was always a possibility given his no-trade. I actually laid one out -- you trade Marcel Ozuna instead, maybe Justin Bour, too and get less prospects back by having the other teams take all or most of Junichi Tazawa and Edinson Volquez's salaries. When the Yankees lowballed them, they had to ask for more prospects. If pressed, they explain their backup plan. They make it clear that they don't have to trade him (and they absolutely didn't). Maybe Cashman includes more talent, maybe he balks. But every GM makes the trade that just happened, because it's a terrible trade for the Marlins. This is how not to do things. Decide on your plan A, and commit to it mentally even if it proves to be a bad idea. In fact, make it clear to the world that you are committed to it, insuring that you'll get the least possible value from it when you execute it. This silver lining is that I don't see how this doesn't destroy the Marlins franchise. Buying the Marlins and trading Stanton for way below market value is (I suspect and hope) Jeter's version of starting a gaming corporation.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 11, 2017 8:51:15 GMT -5
The Marlins needed a backup plan to slash payroll if there was no acceptable offer for Stanton, which was always a possibility given his no-trade. I actually laid one out -- you trade Marcel Ozuna instead, maybe Justin Bour, too and get less prospects back by having the other teams take all or most of Junichi Tazawa and Edinson Volquez's salaries. When the Yankees lowballed them, they had to ask for more prospects. If pressed, they explain their backup plan. They make it clear that they don't have to trade him (and they absolutely didn't). Maybe Cashman includes more talent, maybe he balks. But every GM makes the trade that just happened, because it's a terrible trade for the Marlins. This is how not to do things. Decide on your plan A, and commit to it mentally even if it proves to be a bad idea. In fact, make it clear to the world that you are committed to it, insuring that you'll get the least possible value from it when you execute it. This silver lining is that I don't see how this doesn't destroy the Marlins franchise. Buying the Marlins and trading Stanton for way below market value is (I suspect and hope) Jeter's version of starting a gaming corporation. What's so weird to me is that the Marlins seemed so eager to let everyone in the world know that they were absolutely trading Stanton this winter. There was even the thing where Jeter came out and said he hadn't talked to Stanton, which felt like some sort of weird play for jock dominance, made Jeter look awful, and officially gave Stanton 100% of the leverage. So yeah, good job showing him who's who, Jeets. They proactively put themselves in a situation where they would be forced to accept a terrible trade for the only player that made their franchise relevant. Honestly it's hard to imagine what they could have done as new owners that would have been any worse. This isn't even a hindsight thing, by the way. Listen to Jeff Sullivan's analysis of their position BEFORE the trade was made: overcast.fm/+H4YuuWtk/42:30
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 11, 2017 8:57:23 GMT -5
The only ray of sunshine in this absolute embarrassment? At least we were right about Derek Jeter.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 11, 2017 9:21:54 GMT -5
The only ray of sunshine in this absolute embarrassment? At least we were right about Derek Jeter. The only thing that would make this even better is if he came out of retirement to play SS for the Marlins for $20 million a year. Would make it pretty much identical to Mario Lemieux and the Penguins, when they gave away Jagr and Ron Francis for nothing while he paid himself 20% of the payroll to play every other game while he rested up for the Olympics.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 11, 2017 12:01:53 GMT -5
The Marlins needed a backup plan to slash payroll if there was no acceptable offer for Stanton, which was always a possibility given his no-trade. I actually laid one out -- you trade Marcel Ozuna instead, maybe Justin Bour, too and get less prospects back by having the other teams take all or most of Junichi Tazawa and Edinson Volquez's salaries. When the Yankees lowballed them, they had to ask for more prospects. If pressed, they explain their backup plan. They make it clear that they don't have to trade him (and they absolutely didn't). Maybe Cashman includes more talent, maybe he balks. But every GM makes the trade that just happened, because it's a terrible trade for the Marlins. This is how not to do things. Decide on your plan A, and commit to it mentally even if it proves to be a bad idea. In fact, make it clear to the world that you are committed to it, insuring that you'll get the least possible value from it when you execute it. This silver lining is that I don't see how this doesn't destroy the Marlins franchise. Buying the Marlins and trading Stanton for way below market value is (I suspect and hope) Jeter's version of starting a gaming corporation. What's so weird to me is that the Marlins seemed so eager to let everyone in the world know that they were absolutely trading Stanton this winter. There was even the thing where Jeter came out and said he hadn't talked to Stanton, which felt like some sort of weird play for jock dominance, made Jeter look awful, and officially gave Stanton 100% of the leverage. So yeah, good job showing him who's who, Jeets. They proactively put themselves in a situation where they would be forced to accept a terrible trade for the only player that made their franchise relevant. Honestly it's hard to imagine what they could have done as new owners that would have been any worse. This isn't even a hindsight thing, by the way. Listen to Jeff Sullivan's analysis of their position BEFORE the trade was made: overcast.fm/+H4YuuWtk/42:30The ultimate math on this deal: There was a consensus that Stanton was worth his contract and nothing more, so the two prospects in return for the last eight years of the contract is perfectly reasonable. The Marlins are paying the Yankees $30M. They'll pay Starlin Castro $22M in 2018 and 2019. So their total cost there is $52M (although of course the majority is amortized over 8 more years). The thing is, they were only paying Stanton $51M the next two seasons. So they just paid the New York Yankees $1M (and got the opportunity to spread some cash out over the future) to downgrade from Giancarlo Stanton to Starlin Castro in 2018 and 2019. In return for this, they don't have to worry that Stanton will have negative value two years from now. Put it another way. They could have kept Stanton for two years and put him on waivers. Instead, they'll have Castro for those two years. But they did get the two prospects for just $1M!
|
|
|
Post by swingingbunt on Dec 11, 2017 12:14:01 GMT -5
Not quite. If he opts out, the Yankees don't get any money from the Marlins. Their payments don't start until after Giancarlo has his opt out.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 11, 2017 13:41:23 GMT -5
Not quite. If he opts out, the Yankees don't get any money from the Marlins. Their payments don't start until after Giancarlo has his opt out. Regardless of the details, the big picture is that the Marlins, for no good reason, aggressively and enthusiastically maneuvered themselves into a position where one of three or four teams was going to make them a very weak offer for Stanton and they would have no real choice but to accept it. Derek Jeter, by the way, could be doing anything else with his time and money. He could be feeding the hungry, he could be sitting on a very nice beach with a cool beverage. But he’s doing this.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2017 13:44:28 GMT -5
It seems a few people on here have lost their minds over Stanton and aren't thinking clearly. Like in the last 3 years they forget 2017 is the outlier. The year of the Homerun, the most every hit in the history of the game. Like a 50% increase since 2014. It's why power hitters are having a very hard time getting paid. It's like you guys think 2017 is the norm for Stanton and there's no chance 2015 and 2016 happen again. After those years Stanton had probally the worst contract in Baseball. A contract so bad not one team would claim and take him for free. Heck even after his great 2017, not one team in Baseball would take that full contract. The Yankees demanded money, the Dodgers demanded money, every team demanded the Marlins add money for the current MVP. Those are facts my friends. So they idea that they could just keep him and then just let a team claim him is laughable. That would be a massive risk for a team that lost 10s of millions with a 100 million dollar payroll. For what? So they can finish dead last in attendance again? So they can't fill the stadium even when they give away free tickets? All while Stanton has an MVP season.
What to do with the savings? Easy you buy low on free agents that get overlooked and then flip them at the deadline for prospects. Use his 30 million to do that for 3-4 years and you will get a ton of prospects. The A's do it every year. The Marlins don't have the revenue to pay a player like Stanton and make money. You don't keep a 30 million a year player, when you plan on having a 50 to 60 million dollar payroll. Then in the long run you can add a bunch of good pieces to build a team with 30 million a year.
Already reports that the Mets are going to talk to the Marlins about Castro. With the limited 2nd base market, he is gone. I bet they get a few decent prospects for him. So the final deal will be those prospects, the two from the Yankees and 30 million only if he doesn't opt out. Considering the Giants wanted the Marlins to eat 45 million and that their system sucks. The Yankees offer might turn out better. Guzman has one heck of an arm and might be #1 or #2 in the Giants system.
When you lose 10s of millions with a 100 million dollar payroll you don't take chances you get stuck with a player and his 10 year 295 million contract. That is dumb. That's like saying you should keep a house you can't afford when the market is at its peak, because maybe it goes higher. Thing is maybe it goes lower. If you can't afford it and the market is at its peak you sell sell sell. The one thing no one talks about is the Dodgers were willing to trade more prospects if the Marlins ate more money. Depending on the prospects that might have been worth it, but not trading him would have been a huge mistake. A risk that the Marlins just couldn't afford.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 11, 2017 13:57:02 GMT -5
It seems a few people on here have lost their minds over Stanton and aren't thinking clearly. Like in the last 3 years they forget 2017 is the outlier. The year of the Homerun, the most every hit in the history of the game. Like a 50% increase since 2014. It's why power hitters are having a very hard time getting paid. It's like you guys think 2017 is the norm for Stanton and there's no chance 2015 and 2016 happen again. After those years Stanton had probally the worst contract in Baseball. A contract so bad not one team would claim and take him for free. Heck even after his great 2017, not one team in Baseball would take that full contract. The Yankees demanded money, the Dodgers demanded money, every team demanded the Marlins add money for the current MVP. Those are facts my friends. So they idea that they could just keep him and then just let a team claim him is laughable. That would be a massive risk for a team that lost 10s of millions with a 100 million dollar payroll. For what? So they can finish dead last in attendance again? So they can't fill the stadium even when they give away free tickets? All while Stanton has an MVP season. What to do with the savings? Easy you buy low on free agents that get overlooked and then flip them at the deadline for prospects. Use his 30 million to do that for 3-4 years and you will get a ton of prospects. The A's do it every year. The Marlins don't have the revenue to pay a player like Stanton and make money. You don't keep a 30 million a year player, when you plan on having a 50 to 60 million dollar payroll. Then in the long run you can add a bunch of good pieces to build a team with 30 million a year. Already reports that the Mets are going to talk to the Marlins about Castro. With the limited 2nd base market, he is gone. I bet they get a few decent prospects for him. So the final deal will be those prospects, the two from the Yankees and 30 million only if he doesn't opt out. Considering the Giants wanted the Marlins to eat 45 million and that their system sucks. The Yankees offer might turn out better. Guzman has one heck of an arm and might be #1 or #2 in the Giants system. When you lose 10s of millions with a 100 million dollar payroll you don't take chances you get stuck with a player and his 10 year 295 million contract. That is dumb. That's like saying you should keep a house you can't afford when the market is at its peak, because maybe it goes higher. Thing is maybe it goes lower. If you can't afford it and the market is at its peak you sell sell sell. The one thing no one talks about is the Dodgers were willing to trade more prospects if the Marlins ate more money. Depending on the prospects that might have been worth it, but not trading him would have been a huge mistake. A risk that the Marlins just couldn't afford. I don't think anybody here expects him to hit 59 home runs again, but he is going to a HR ballpark and they're taking away the strike at the bottom of the knee meaning that pitchers will be forced to bring the ball up - that doesn't exactly hurt the hitters. If the guy hits 40 he's going to help his club immensely. And in 2017 the Red Sox apparently didn't get the memo that everybody was hitting homeruns. 24 was the top total for the Sox. If Stanton were on the Sox most of us would be jumping for joy. I have trouble believing if the Sox were presented the opportunity at the kind of deal the Yankees got that you wouldn't be excited about it and think it was a major, crucial acquisition for a team lacking in power. I know you probably already have him injured but he played 159 games last season and this season, unlike others, he gets to DH if he's banged up or has nagging injuries. It should preserve the wear and tear on him. Would you be excited if the Sox went out and got JD Martinez? What's his health track record. You want health - go get Eric Hosmer, ground ball specialist.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2017 14:06:48 GMT -5
Did you even read my post? It was all about why it made sense for the Marlins to trade him. So your comments really make no sense.
|
|
|
Post by p23w on Dec 11, 2017 14:28:28 GMT -5
Yes. Your post made sense. But that does not take the Sting away from watching our best rival increase their main advantage over our team. This just plain sucks. And trying to place blame on Jeter, the commissioners office, Dombrowski, the Boston media is just fans venting. Besides, won't it be more fun for the Cora and the boys to "slay" Goliath? As a life long RS fan I am comfortable in our role as underdog. Makes beating Aaron F. Boone and his band of mercenaries all that more enjoyable. Start the Gregorian chants, bring on the whirling dervishes, we are on a mission.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 11, 2017 14:41:12 GMT -5
Did you even read my post? It was all about why it made sense for the Marlins to trade him. So your comments really make no sense. Check your first few lines about people losing their minds regarding Stanton, then my response makes sense. If you left that out and made your point you're trying to make I wouldn't have responded.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Dec 11, 2017 15:39:54 GMT -5
Stanton's agent at the Yankees press conference-
"Boston never came to us with a opportunity to go there, I don't think there was any interest from them."
I'm paraphrasing, but it is the exact scenario that I thought it was. The Red Sox or in other words, John Henry didn't want the Stanton contract.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 11, 2017 15:43:58 GMT -5
This should go over well with many here.
I am in the corner renting my garments and screaming blasphemy.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 11, 2017 15:51:34 GMT -5
It seems a few people on here have lost their minds over Stanton and aren't thinking clearly. Like in the last 3 years they forget 2017 is the outlier. The year of the Homerun, the most every hit in the history of the game. Like a 50% increase since 2014. It's why power hitters are having a very hard time getting paid. It's like you guys think 2017 is the norm for Stanton and there's no chance 2015 and 2016 happen again. After those years Stanton had probally the worst contract in Baseball. A contract so bad not one team would claim and take him for free. Heck even after his great 2017, not one team in Baseball would take that full contract. The Yankees demanded money, the Dodgers demanded money, every team demanded the Marlins add money for the current MVP. Those are facts my friends. So they idea that they could just keep him and then just let a team claim him is laughable. That would be a massive risk for a team that lost 10s of millions with a 100 million dollar payroll. For what? So they can finish dead last in attendance again? So they can't fill the stadium even when they give away free tickets? All while Stanton has an MVP season. Very few of these things are facts, as it turns out. 1. Stanton is one of the players who has the most to gain from a de-juiced ball. He's less reliant on environmental factors for his power than anyone in baseball except maybe Judge. Didi Gregorius and Brian Dozier are in trouble if the ball goes back to normal, whereas Stanton will only be more valuable as power dries up across the league. 2. The contract isn't underwater. You can look at the math here if you want: www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-case-for-acquiring-stanton/If you want to argue that the projection systems are wrong about Stanton... show your work. And "He wasn't great in 2016" isn't sufficient. 3. The Dodgers, Yankees, etc, demanded money because they were in a position to make that demand. It wasn't a reflection on Stanton's value, it's a reflection of the Marlins's awful negotiating tactics. This has been explained several times in this thread. Dude, they're talking about getting their payroll down to $55m. Not that what you're talking about is ever that effective a strategy for building a farm system but they're not going to be able to sign many of even the crappiest free agents. Stanton is a once-in-a-generation franchise defining player for the Marlins. If an owner can't afford to keep him around, he has no business owning an MLB franchise.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Dec 11, 2017 15:57:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2017 16:22:06 GMT -5
Did you even read my post? It was all about why it made sense for the Marlins to trade him. So your comments really make no sense. Check your first few lines about people losing their minds regarding Stanton, then my response makes sense. If you left that out and made your point you're trying to make I wouldn't have responded. It's called context.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 11, 2017 16:46:08 GMT -5
"I didn't ask the hottie to dance because she'd just say no." Brilliant strategy Front Office. Can't wait to hear Dombrowski talk circles around this one.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 11, 2017 16:47:14 GMT -5
Check your first few lines about people losing their minds regarding Stanton, then my response makes sense. If you left that out and made your point you're trying to make I wouldn't have responded. It's called context. It's called reading your other posts in which you basically state that the impact of the Yankees getting Stanton and not the Red Sox isn't that big - at least as much as others around here are making it to be, and you reiterated that right off the bat with your other post.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2017 16:49:04 GMT -5
Fenway- My point is about the Marlins, more than Stanton the player. That team doesn't have the revenue to afford him. Look at the numbers. You seem to be looking at this as a Red Sox fan not understanding that certain teams just can't afford mega contracts and the risk they carry. I remember reading how Pujols was worth his deal years ago. No one can predict how a player will age and perform over 10 years. Even if he performs and is worth the money, if you don't make enough money to build a team around him, does it matter? The Marlins just spent a bunch of money in 2017 to try and win. Stanton had an MVP season and the team couldn't fill the stadium even when giving away free tickets. Think about that for a second. Brand new stadium, epic season from Stanton and even free tickets can't get fans to the games.
How is Stanton a once in a generation type player? He's not Mike Trout. Affording him is about revenue, not the owners. Unless you think owners shouldn't make money. For years everyone thought a new stadium was what the Marlins needed to compete. Now it looks more like Miami is just not a baseball town. In this day and age if you spend 100 million on payroll and lose 10s of millions thats not on the owners, but the fans. The Marlins are not the Red Sox. You can think all you want they did this to themselves. When in reality Jeter looked at the numbers and knows changing the Marlins is a long-term build. He had to move Stanton to do a Houston Astro type rebuild. Hoping that might get the fans to actually care about the team and spend money to see them.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2017 16:50:46 GMT -5
It's called reading your other posts in which you basically state that the impact of the Yankees getting Stanton and not the Red Sox isn't that big - at least as much as others around here are making it to be, and you reiterated that right off the bat with your other post. Which one is that?
|
|
|
Post by wrangler713 on Dec 11, 2017 16:53:26 GMT -5
Giancarlo Stanton just turned 28 and he might be oldest Yankees in that lineup. That is sickening. Assuming they deal off Headley and let Andujar play 3B. I think Andujar is going to be a stud for them too. He's one of the guys I've always hoped they traded away. They still have an incredible farm system too. imagine the revenue they will get for having Judge and Stanton.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 11, 2017 16:57:43 GMT -5
Stanton's agent at the Yankees press conference- "Boston never came to us with a opportunity to go there, I don't think there was any interest from them." I'm paraphrasing, but it is the exact scenario that I thought it was. The Red Sox or in other words, John Henry didn't want the Stanton contract. It's not like agents don't lie, but I believe him. If the Red Sox had presented the Marlins with an offer to pay off the contract Stanton would have met with the Sox the same way SF and St. Louis did. And I think the Red Sox could have made a really persuasive sales pitch to get Stanton to sign - having David Ortiz around to sell the Sox certainly wouldn't hurt. The agent said the Sox are prioritizing pitching. What's that supposed to mean? Are they hoping that they can find the new Curt Schilling, a starter actually capable of going more than 3 quality innings in a post-season start? This team had a legit shot at acquiring the best power hitter of his generation, somebody working on a Cooperstown resume, and they weren't interested. That sounds like that's the case and it really pisses me off. John Henry didn't want to spend the money. The Yankees did and this is a transaction that will haunt the Red Sox because they possibly could have prevented this.
|
|
|