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 gregblossersbelly on Sept 15, 2013 9:50:42 GMT -5
John Harper mentioned Cargo in his column today as a Met target. Says the Rockies want position players not pitchers. He cites an executive who claims they will seriously consider trading him and rebuild. Along with Tulo. Do we match-up better with them? JBJ and Cecchini do it? Along with a decent pitching prospect. Ranaudo or Webster?? They could play Garin at 1b. www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/harper-cashman-play-bad-guy-jeter-article-1.1456155 Cargo has 4 years left on his deal; 10.5m, 16m, 17m and 20m. But, the AAV is only 11.1M because it was back-loaded which helps our luxury tax number. He'll be 28 next month. Should get 4 very good years out of him. His OPS this year is 958. 930 at home and 987 on the road with a lot of games in SF, LA and SD. Career OPS is 887 with 922 at home and 774 on the road. Fenway is a great hitting park too. With his road splits going up as he gains experience, I am not worried about a drop-off in production
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 15, 2013 22:19:53 GMT -5
He's one of the best players in baseball. Talks would start with Bogaerts and go up from there.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 15, 2013 23:06:16 GMT -5
Looks like we're starting this back and forth early this year. If the club loses they need to be stripped of their minor league players. If they win the same has to happen. I guess I'm missing something.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 16, 2013 9:38:45 GMT -5
Looks like we're starting this back and forth early this year. If the club loses they need to be stripped of their minor league players. If they win the same has to happen. I guess I'm missing something. Your starting CF is going to command 7/yr north of 100 million. I don't feel JBJ will ever be as good as Ellsbury. Let alone Cargo. You get a better replacement for significantly less money and an AAV which allows your team to keep guys like Napoli and Salty. I think you're a reasonable poster Norm. But, if you think we should keep all of our prospects and not make trades. The trade forum isn't the place for you
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pereira on Sept 16, 2013 10:55:23 GMT -5
I would like to see the Red Sox go after him or Cargo, but like Chris said, negotiating starts with Bogaerts. I don't know if I'm willing to see him shipped, even for those studs.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 16, 2013 11:45:11 GMT -5
I would like to see the Red Sox go after him or Cargo, but like Chris said, negotiating starts with Bogaerts. I don't know if I'm willing to see him shipped, even for those studs. Bogaerts is an untouchable. We're not getting Cargo if they insist on him. The difference between what Xander might give us at shortstop and what we can prob do at CF if we don't get Cargo is enough to nix trading Xander.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Sept 16, 2013 13:47:29 GMT -5
Why would anyone think about trading Bogaerts? Come on people.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 16, 2013 16:32:00 GMT -5
Why would anyone think about trading Bogaerts? Come on people. Not one person in this thread said we should trade Bogaerts. What are you talking about? I speculated that we should try to trade for Cargo without even mentioning him. Chris said that we couldn't get Cargo unless Xander in the deal. He didn't say we should. I followed it up by saying no deal then.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Sept 16, 2013 17:54:54 GMT -5
These talks are all just nonsense. Always are.
Side A. Can we get superstar player X without giving up "so and so" (today so and so is Xander)
Side B. you have to give up "so and so"
Side A. All it takes is one guy. Look at this trade.
Side B. yea but that trade only happened because of some circumstance that clearly doesn't apply here.
Bottom line. Yes the Sox should explore a Cargo trade to see what the cost is. No way to expect it to get done or to throw out what names it'd take. Neither side is necessarily correct in what it would or wouldn't take to finalize a deal.
Unless you think Hazelbaker (BC he's really fast and has pop) plus Coyle (BC he ht a lot of hrs at 2b), plus light (1st rd pitcher) plus Marrero (BC he an play defense in the majors right now at short) plus Brentz(BC he'd hit 35 hrs a year in Colorado) would be enough then you are wrong and silly and probably 12.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pereira on Sept 16, 2013 21:16:23 GMT -5
When I said "him," I mean Stanton. Just wanted to clarify, as I thought the original post was for Stanton.
Bottom line, you gotta trade talent to receive talent. If you want the Sox to get CarGo or Stanton, Bogaerts will have to be included in an outgoing package. That's life.
Unless the Marlins are dumb enough to accept a trade with JBJ as the centerpiece. It is the Marlins, right? Who knows.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Sept 16, 2013 23:07:21 GMT -5
I don't want the Sox to get Stanton or CarGo then.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Sept 19, 2013 9:56:21 GMT -5
I was just thinking what would happen if Detroit went for broke and traded for Tulo and Cargo, especially after the Sox spank them in the ALCS. They would have to give Iglesias, Castello, the rest of their farm system and take on all the salary just to get the conversation started. It is just crazy to think about what that lineup would be.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pereira on Sept 19, 2013 11:55:39 GMT -5
I was just thinking what would happen if Detroit went for broke and traded for Tulo and Cargo, especially after the Sox spank them in the ALCS. They would have to give Iglesias, Castello, the rest of their farm system and take on all the salary just to get the conversation started. It is just crazy to think about what that lineup would be. Just imagine if the Sox can pull off a Stanton or CarGo trade without surrendering Bogaerts? That'd be a deadly lineup as well.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 23, 2013 15:40:30 GMT -5
I don't think the Red Sox are likely to trade a shortstop with once in a lifetime power potential but I don't think we're out of the mix either. Look around, there aren't many infielders of roughly equivalent value.I don't think the Rangers or Twins would be any more likely to trade Profar or Sano then we would with Xander.
We also have a wildcard, Lackey. His elbow year makes him worth his weight in prospects. For good, smaller market teams with young talent that's ready to win now, like the Royals or Pirates, he'd fetch a decent prospect(s).
The Sox 2014 rotation would then be:
Buccholz Lester Peavy Doubront Dempster/Workman/Britton/Ranaudo/Webster/Barnes or other.
It isn't out of the question that the return on half price Lackey plus a JBJ,Cecchini or Betts would be the best offer Colorado is going to receive.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Sept 25, 2013 10:02:43 GMT -5
Just spitballing but what about
Their pick of a catching prospect Swihart or Vazquez (Lavarnway/Butler also available which they would pass) Their pick of a pitching prospect Barnes, Webster, or Ranaudo Brentz Marrero Generic low A lottery ticket player(S) Red Sox take on all salary due to Gonzalez for remained of contract any other minor add ins
Now I am not trying to suggest that this gets the deal done, and it is a buy low scenario, but does it put our name in the hat? If the Rockies are committed to a rebuild and this is the best deal on the table do they still pass? The newest Minorleagueball + BA rankings would suggests that Webster or Ranaudo would instantly become the Rockies top prospect. Swihart would be in the 3-5 range and Brentz and Marrero would be top 10ish.
I don't think the Red Sox trade for him because I think this is the best offer they would be willing to make, which would either be rejected or beat by another club. The two other interesting possibilities I can think of are if we add Cecchinni to the package (or instead of the catching/pitching prospect), or if we resign Drew, move Bogaerts to third, and start a dialog about Middlebrooks.
Well that's just me thinking out loud. Basically if the Rockies decide they need to trade Gonzalez and rebuild and no other team is making a serious offer, We can give them 4-5 B level prospects and take on his salary.
Edit: I still know this is a buy load offer, no one needs to point that out. But I would argue against the talks starting with Bogaerts. He is a unanimous top 5 prospect, other buyers for Gonzalez cannot duplicate his value. Profar might be the closest guy available, but I think his value dropped a ton this year. If you take St. Louis out of the running, the next top prospect on a contending big market team is Castellanos, which might make sense. After that if the Mets take a shot parting with D'Arnaud. But the way I see it, odds are if Gonzalez gets traded, it is for a package that does not include a top 25 prospect. And the Red Sox are a great fit to put together a package of top 50-200 guys. Once again I think a lot of it is determined by how much the Rockies feel the need to start a rebuild.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 25, 2013 11:25:28 GMT -5
Wouldn't even get you close, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Sept 25, 2013 11:52:26 GMT -5
Wouldn't even get you close, IMO. Well Chris in your opinion what realistic offers are out there? Would Texas give up Profar, St. Louis give up Tavares, New York give up D'Arnaud, Detroit give up Castellanos, or Chicago give up Baez? Profar seems most likely, but slim odds on the rest. Does the trade happen without a top 25 prospect included? I will admit I thought Gonzalez contract was much bigger, and that factored into my logic. I thought he was owed 20-22M per year till 2017, but I just found this. $10.5 million in ’14, $16 million in ’15; $17 million in ’16 and $20 million in ’17. Pretty reasonable for the type of player he is.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Sept 25, 2013 12:10:51 GMT -5
Yea guys like Cargo would/will cost a ton. I wonder how much value Doubront has on the trade market. Not suggesting Cargo of course but we will have six starters next year and that's not including Workman, Rubby, Webster and Ranoudo.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 25, 2013 12:32:52 GMT -5
Has nothing to do with what offers are out there. That logic assumes there's a gun to the Rockies' heads and they HAVE to trade him to someone. It has to do with that offer not sending them a player who even might give them comparable value. It also has nothing to do with where guys would fit in their rankings, because the players' individual values remain constant no matter where they're ranked. The fact is that a package headlined by Swihart and one of those three pitchers isn't near good enough, no matter how much filler you tack onto the back of it.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Sept 25, 2013 14:59:53 GMT -5
Has nothing to do with what offers are out there. That logic assumes there's a gun to the Rockies' heads and they HAVE to trade him to someone. It has to do with that offer not sending them a player who even might give them comparable value. It also has nothing to do with where guys would fit in their rankings, because the players' individual values remain constant no matter where they're ranked. The fact is that a package headlined by Swihart and one of those three pitchers isn't near good enough, no matter how much filler you tack onto the back of it. I really don't see anywhere were I inferred that the Rockies had to trade Car-go, gun to head style. I laid out the scenario that I personally thought Red Sox would be willing to give up for him (admitting it probably would not be enough). I also admitted I made a big mistake on the type of contract he had. I also mentioned Cecchini in my post. Trade value has 100% to do with what other offers are out there. It is what sets the market. Justin Upton went from being worth Walker, Franklyn, and Pryor to being worth Prado and Delgado, solely because of what offers were available. The Diamondbacks did not have to trade Upton by any means, but at that time it made more sense to take a lesser deal then to keep him. Going off the midseason reports Cecchini will be somewhere around a top 25-40 prospect. If we are assuming the Rockies want to trade Car-go for position player prospect to start a rebuilding process, like the report suggest, and we eliminate those other top prospects from likely trade partners that I asked you about, then Ceccinni would be next in line. Sure, it might still not be enough, but at the same time it might make more sense for the Rockies to lose with 5 new prospects and salary relief instead of losing with Cargo. My scenario is obviously a stars aligning view, but I was trying to start a broader discussion of what Gonzalez was worth/what teams would give up for him, instead of just assuming it doesn't matter. IMO, I think the chances Bogaerts is traded this offseason are about the same chances we see Lester catching in the playoffs. He is a top 5 prospect, so if you take Tavares off the table there is no other likely trade partners with a prospect of similar value. If you are saying trade talks start with Bogaerts and move up from there, you are saying in other words any reports that Car-go will be traded are wrong. As you said, individual values remain constant, and there and not many individuals who have the value of Bogaerts.
|
|
|
Post by uconnsox on Nov 1, 2013 9:26:17 GMT -5
Just a thought, but with the wealth of young arms that the Red Sox currently possess as well as our 6 established ML starters, what about a trade built around Buchholz for CarGo? I think WMB and Buchholz would be fair value to the Rockies. Would also allow us to give Drew a 3 year deal. I'd Be comfortable with a Lester/Lackey/Doubront/Peavy/Dempster rotation for 2014. CarGo would also be key in replacing production we expect to lose in FA (Ellsbury, Napoli), as well as being an impact lefty bat to help ease the transition when we lose Ortiz. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by bmitchsox on Nov 12, 2013 11:57:29 GMT -5
Just a thought, but with the wealth of young arms that the Red Sox currently possess as well as our 6 established ML starters, what about a trade built around Buchholz for CarGo? I think WMB and Buchholz would be fair value to the Rockies. Would also allow us to give Drew a 3 year deal. I'd Be comfortable with a Lester/Lackey/Doubront/Peavy/Dempster rotation for 2014. CarGo would also be key in replacing production we expect to lose in FA (Ellsbury, Napoli), as well as being an impact lefty bat to help ease the transition when we lose Ortiz. Thoughts? I love the idea! I think it would definitely be a fair deal. Buchholz is an ace when healthy, but i strongly question if he can stay healthy. Maybe we could get Tulo if we throw in Betts, Webster, Brentz, Britton, Vazquez. Definitely a possibility if we eat all the money. We would have the best defensive OF, Tulo and Bogaerts on the left side for a while. The Rockies can then start out on a solid bebuild.
|
|
|
Post by theburn on Jul 14, 2014 10:00:48 GMT -5
I'd love to re-evaluate the possibility of a Cargo trade. Though Dick Monfort has reiterated his reluctance to move either Tulo or CarGo, and the team doesn't have any present need to trade either player, as the Rockies head toward their fourth straight losing season this year, it's hard to believe these needs holding true. The Red Sox have a need for veteran presence next year (and beyond), they have a need for an outfielder, and they have a need for left-handed power (especially after Ortiz departs). CarGo obviously addresses all of these. Finally, the Red Sox have the pieces to deal to make this happen, and while it would likely mean giving up at least one of Bogaerts, Betts, Bradley, or Owens, should the Rockies be willing to sell, it might be worth consideration.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 14, 2014 10:11:53 GMT -5
I agree that Gonzalez seems like a great fit on paper (there's also the fact that he's 28, in the midst of his prime, and his current contract only covers his prime years (he'll be a free agent again when he's 32)).
But I have questions about his home/away splits and his lengthy injury history, and whether in light of that, the prospect cost will be worth it (I agree that at least one of Boston's true blue-chippers will be necessary, and likely more).
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Jul 14, 2014 10:15:03 GMT -5
Displaced Sox fan in Denver here, not a chance CarGo gets moved this year. The PR backlash against Monfort recent fan interactions is so great right now, there is no way they will be willing to move the 2nd most popular player in town. On top of that, he is not even willing to move Cuddyer who is essentially worthless at this point.
|
|
|