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.
A Logical Look at Giancarlo Stanton
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 11, 2014 14:37:25 GMT -5
The A's really need Jonny Gomes for those intangibles to help them win it all.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Jul 11, 2014 15:28:40 GMT -5
Ctfisher
1. I seriously doubt you are going to get Stanton without including at a minimum Betts or Bogaerts.
2. I think the three players you named are GOING to be impact players; for now they are still prospects.
3. When you make a trade, you in theory are just as likely to give up more than you get. Unless you believe that (a) there are significantly over-rated prospects in the Sox system, (b) the Red Sox know who they are and (c) the Marlins don't, trading for Stanton is just as likely to end up badly as well.
I think the Red Sox are a couple years from contention and they ought to be patient and hope their young stars develop.
I would much prefer they load up a pair of trucks with cash and try to re-sign Jon Lester and sign Max Scherzer than trade prospects for Stanton.
|
|
|
Post by redsox4242 on Jul 12, 2014 0:29:29 GMT -5
How about this trade for Giancarlo Stanton:
Marrero, Swihart Webster Ranaudo
If we could add Stanton to the lineup, we would be in great shape. Ortiz has two years left tops, so we need a power bat. I would do this trade in a second, if we had to include Owens i would strongly consider it.
|
|
ak37
Rookie
Posts: 8
|
Post by ak37 on Jul 12, 2014 0:59:32 GMT -5
How about this trade for Giancarlo Stanton: Marrero, Swihart Webster Ranaudo If we could add Stanton to the lineup, we would be in great shape. Ortiz has two years left tops, so we need a power bat. I would do this trade in a second, if we had to include Owens i would strongly consider it. Agreed 100% Honestly - we can put something together to get Stanton......I firmly believe it You can trade one the following as the building blocks of a deal: 1) Workman or De La Rosa 2) Webster or Ranaudo 3) Middlebrooks or Bogaerts or Cecchini Personally I think Vazquez, Marrero and Ranaudo are guys that are going to be big time players for us.......I even think Middlebrooks is going to put it together and end up at 1st base or LF - I'd love to give him a shot in LF, he's a much better athlete than Gomes so i know he can play LF. I think this is an offer that could net Stanton: Webster Workman Cecchini Swihart (Add in a low level guy like a Trey Ball or someone like Barnes if that's what it takes).........that's a hard deal for Miami to say no to and the Red Sox can still come away with Bogaerts at 3B, Marrero at SS, Middlebrooks at 1st base with Stanton in LF and Vazquez as your every day catcher C - Vazquez 1B - Napoli then Middlebrooks 2B - Pedroia SS - Marrero 3B - Bogaerts LF - Stanton CF - Bradley RF - Betts / Holt Lester Lackey Buchholz De La Rosa Ranaudo Owens
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,020
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 12, 2014 2:33:44 GMT -5
On a different subject, I think it is a waste of energy to speculate about trading for Stanton. There is no reason why Miami should trade him now in any kind of reasonable deal. (More off-topic stuff, but I can't resist.) Except for their literally having replacement level players at 1B, 2B, and SS, and no one anywhere in the minors who's a prospect at those positions, plus a FA 3B having a fluke season and his heir apparent looking like his ETA is 2017 rather than next year. It would actually be easy for them to trade Stanton and improve the club for next year. They wouldn't even have to get particularly good players for him -- they could trade him for a 2 WAR right fielder (they don't have any corner OF prospects anywhere close to MLB, either) and three 2 WAR infielders. If they dealt him for actually good young players at any three of those five positions, that would be an immediate gain, never mind past 2016. Sometimes an organization is so thin at both the MLB and farm system levels that they have to trade their best asset for quantity. The Marlins right now are a textbook case.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,020
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 12, 2014 22:04:53 GMT -5
I suggest someone watch a few Marlins games before hammering on Hech. He's got tremendous range and good hands, not to mention other than not taking many walks? Isn't too different of a player than what Iglesias would have given Boston otherwise. I would hardly classify that as "desperate need of replacement" when they have him cost controlled for 4 more seasons. I doubt SS is a position they would look to "fix" in the always cost conscious minds of Miami brass. Hechevarria has played 2095 innings at SS. UZR/150 has him at -9, DRS -3, TZ at -6, and FRAA -5. If he's Jose Iglesias (+16 UZR, +12 DRS), Keanu Reeves is Marlon Brando. Yeah, I looked at their pitching, and a guy like Webster, the way he's pitching right now, would be in battle for a rotation spot rather than getting a free ride into the rotation. So any pitcher in a deal would have less value than expected, unless they were clearly a mid-rotation guy or a guy with frontline potential. I didn't realize that McGehee has one more year left until free agency -- I guess my brain was counting the year he just played in Japan. I don't think he gets them all the way to Moran, though, because a guy with his stat line in low-A is unlikely to cross three levels next year. So they'll probably be looking for a 3B in a year. My assumption was that one or more of the key pieces would be obtained in the fire sale, which is why I'm so eager to trade and re-sign Koji (and Miller and Ross), and trade Lester, decide later about signing him, and be willing to pay market price if he's needed. I'm now thinking a possible deal would be Coyle, Marrero, and the two best guys we get from the fire sale, a 1B and a corner OF. One of those four guys would have to look like a probable star, and the other three like solid contributors with upside. Alternately, perhaps three of these guys and Margot. But it depends on Marreo and Coyle finishing strong and the fire sale reaping the right returns. I'm not saying it's likely. I'm just pointing out that there's a unusual opportunity to trade them quantity rather than multiple elite prospects. Now, if the Sox plan to keep Betts in the OF rather than try him at 3B with Xander at SS, including him in the deal instead of Marrero would make sense -- but make Coyle redundant, so it might be Betts and two fire sale guys (and maybe Margot depending on how good those guys were). But I'd much rather keep Mookie in the infield.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 14, 2014 20:12:32 GMT -5
I personally hope Stanton does horrible in the HR derby so we won't hear more pressure about trading for him.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Jul 14, 2014 22:19:14 GMT -5
Well, he didn't win the derby. That means one fewer prospect we have to give for his services.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jul 14, 2014 23:02:31 GMT -5
Why would you give up any prospects at all for someone who can't even hit a single home run in 7 tries against friendly pitching?
My best offer is Heiker Meneses and a bag of baseballs.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 15, 2014 9:52:25 GMT -5
Just think of all the extra Nick Cafardo articles if he had won.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 15, 2014 15:21:56 GMT -5
Ctfisher 1. I seriously doubt you are going to get Stanton without including at a minimum Betts or Bogaerts. 2. I think the three players you named are GOING to be impact players; for now they are still prospects. 3. When you make a trade, you in theory are just as likely to give up more than you get. Unless you believe that (a) there are significantly over-rated prospects in the Sox system, (b) the Red Sox know who they are and (c) the Marlins don't, trading for Stanton is just as likely to end up badly as well. I think the Red Sox are a couple years from contention and they ought to be patient and hope their young stars develop. I would much prefer they load up a pair of trucks with cash and try to re-sign Jon Lester and sign Max Scherzer than trade prospects for Stanton. I never suggested that we would be keeping all of them- although I can't see Bogaerts getting dealt. Regardless, that's where under-30 impact players come from- prospects developing. So yea we don't have any right now I guess (although you could make a case for Brock Holt) but we have a solid core of good veterans and a developing group of young players, and there's no way of knowing what kind of progress those prospects will make over the next year or two, but it's a good bet that Bogaerts and Bradley will hit substantially better between the 2 of them next year. Replace all the terrible performances of Sizemore/Gomes against righties/Nava's first month and some the rest of the horrific OF play we got this year with 600 Stanton PAs, and that team probably wins the East. Basically, put one prime age star (Stanton) on this team and fill out next years bullpen, and you have a really good team which will most likely make the playoffs. The front office's MO suggests they won't be loading up any trucks with cash, certainly not to sign 2 30 year old pitchers to long term deals, so I'd rather enquire on Stanton at least and see if a deal can be worked out. That brings me to your last point- I don't know that we have any significantly overrated prospects, but even highly rated prospects bust sometimes, and I would assume that the Sox are more familiar with their own farm system than the Marlins (or anyone else) is, so yea I'd be confident that we wouldn't get ripped off for Stanton at any rate, which is the important thing. If it requires stripping down the system of all talent, obviously I'm not in favor of that. But if it's one of our top level guys and several more lower tier ones, I'll take it
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jul 15, 2014 15:36:41 GMT -5
I just caution anyone when proposing trades for Stanton, try to think of the context. If you are going to trade player a,b,c,d than why wouldn't LAD trade players e,d,f,g, then the Yankees, than the Cardnial, than Seattle, Washington, and so on.
I also firmly believe that Miami will not trade Stanton, unless they are overwhelmed. To me overwhelmed starts will Bogaerts, and adds 3-4 blue chips from there.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Jul 15, 2014 16:59:07 GMT -5
As Florida could use some infield help, how about a package of Betts+Marrero+Middlebrooks; with maybe a pitcher thrown in?
I doubt he's gonna move this year, but the off-season seems likely. They would be selling high before he becomes too expensive. Keep in mind, Stanton's arb number will be somewhere in the 12m+ range. Unless the Marlins go into 'win now' mode, I can't imagine them holding onto that for too long.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,020
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 16, 2014 19:59:38 GMT -5
I just caution anyone when proposing trades for Stanton, try to think of the context. If you are going to trade player a,b,c,d than why wouldn't LAD trade players e,d,f,g, then the Yankees, than the Cardnial, than Seattle, Washington, and so on. I also firmly believe that Miami will not trade Stanton, unless they are overwhelmed. To me overwhelmed starts will Bogaerts, and adds 3-4 blue chips from there. They currently have black holes at 1B, 2B, and SS. Their most likely course of action will be to try to upgrade those positions on the cheap, as they did this year with McGehee. If that fails, though, they may well decide (at the next deadline, a year from now) that the only viable future involves trading Stanton. They'd have those three holes, McGehee leaving at season's end, and Stanton leaving the year after. That's four black holes in 2016, five the year after. It makes huge sense to use Stanton to fill as many of those holes as possible. In that case, only a very few teams will be in a position to make that trade. We'll likely have a 2B, SS, and 3B to offer, and if we can pick up a corner OF prospect in the fire sale, we're very, very likely to be the team with the best fit. Having three or four extra MLB-ready good players is rare.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Jul 17, 2014 6:30:40 GMT -5
Right, a year from now. That makes a HUGE difference both in terms of what we'd be willing to offer and what the Marlins would accept. I think it's silly when people say the Marlins will "never" trade him, but to get him right now would take a king's ransom. I think next July is the absolute earliest they would even consider it seriously.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Jul 17, 2014 8:55:25 GMT -5
That has always been my issue with going straight by the numbers and not watching a team over any length of time. Why do you think teams still employ scouts at all? Do you think they just use a numbering system, or do you think that they WATCH the games over a few days?
Take a good long look at the Marlins rotation, even minus Fernadez and you will see that Webster isn't an upgrade and the Fish have 2 kids already about to break in with DeSlafini and Heaney. Desclafini has already had a few starts even this year under emergency conditions, so they have the cost controlled 6-7SP ready.
Same with SS when it goes with strictly "by the numbers". You have to do more than just go that way as a true fan of the game and scouts do.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 17, 2014 9:43:15 GMT -5
Right, a year from now. That makes a HUGE difference both in terms of what we'd be willing to offer and what the Marlins would accept. I think it's silly when people say the Marlins will "never" trade him, but to get him right now would take a king's ransom. I think next July is the absolute earliest they would even consider it seriously. You're probably right, but I think the front office should definitely keep checking in consistently to see if that changes- it's really difficult to get a handle on what the Marlins are asking teams for and what those teams are willing to give up right now, but it seems like this is true of pretty much every team in the majors. They'd love Stanton, but the marlins won't be realistic right now. I think if they have a tough stretch towards the end of the month, maybe the asking price comes down somewhat- right now he's at his peak value, 2 years of team control left and he's putting up MVP numbers, so I know it seems counterintuitive, but they have to know they're not getting the kind of return they're asking for (Springer and Correa from Houston, Bogaerts and others from us, whatever) so to me it would make sense to be realistic, start moving more into a range that teams are actually willing to discuss, and then let a bidding war take shape in the build-up to the deadline. And we'd be in that bidding war at least- no idea if we'd win
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,531
|
Post by nomar on Jul 17, 2014 16:45:04 GMT -5
If we were trading for him at the deadline I would look into a 3 team deal where Lester goes to one team and prospects come from both Boston and the third team to Miami.
So we could end up giving up Lester + Swihart + Ranaudo or something like that
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Jul 29, 2014 13:48:49 GMT -5
I think this is a relatively fair trade for Giancarlo Stanton that I would do.
Betts, Owens, Webster and Margot
The Marlins get 2 great prospects and 2 solid prospects, and it doesn't hurt us too much. Mookie will not get his optimal value playing here, and Owens would hurt but you have to give something to get something
|
|
|
Post by kmann on Jul 29, 2014 14:32:31 GMT -5
I do not think Betts, Owens, Webster and Margot get it done. Add at least another top prospect and were getting closer.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jul 29, 2014 14:34:27 GMT -5
Why are we talking about trading prospects for Stanton when the Marlins are buyers and we're sellers?
|
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,449
|
Post by ianrs on Jul 29, 2014 14:40:05 GMT -5
What he said. I don't think the Marlins move Stanton until next year's deadline at the earliest, and that's only if they are out of contention then.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 29, 2014 14:40:34 GMT -5
The Marlins are supposedly in on Lester. lol
|
|
|
Post by kmann on Jul 29, 2014 14:46:14 GMT -5
The Sox are sellers now, but they will not be a playoff contender in 2015 without using their prospects as trading chips in the offseason. They will make a big push for Stanton in the winter. Free agency spending alone will not be enough. Thats why I am talking about it.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 29, 2014 14:47:38 GMT -5
Can we make a PTBNL trade with the Marlins where the PTBNL is Stanton?
|
|
|