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.
The New Market Inefficiency - GMs on the HotSeat
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Dec 15, 2012 9:20:41 GMT -5
Alright guys, this is my first ever attempt at starting a new thread, and I fully admit I don't post as often as some people on the board, so please, be gentle.
As you look around the league, you're seeing a lot more GMs make some, lets call them questionable moves to win now. Not the least of which have been AA in Toronto (maybe x2 if the Dickey rumors are to be believed), and Dayton Moore in Kansas City. Within the parameters of whom we have already signed, and what is happening in baseball, this is what I want Ben C to do - and hope he's reading this thread for some insane reason.
Call Seattle and get Jack Z on the line. Offer him our daily special of "any five prospects you want not named Bradley or Bogaerts for Felix", he will say emphatically say no, that they are planning to compete with Felix. Turn around the offer and remind him that they only have another two years before Felix is gone. Sure there are some great prospects in the pipeline, but neither Felix - nor at that point Jack Z - will likely be around to see them achieve their potential. Offer him the following package: Jon Lester, Jacoby Ellsbury, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Andrew Bailey, Ryan Kalish and Keury DeLaCruz for Taijuan Walker, Danny Hultzen, Nick Franklin and Justin Smoak.
Cut bait on the Napoli deal with the physical issues and sign Nick Swisher (with the above moves, losing the second round pick is not nearly as big of a deal). Spend money on a two year deal for Shaun Marcum to replace Lester's spot in the rotation. Extend Pedroia.
2013 - this team isn't great but can compete and is marketable.
LineUp: CF - Victorino (S); 2b - Pedroia (R); 3b - Middlebrooks (R); DH - Ortiz (L); RF - Swisher (S); C - Lavarnway (R); LF - Gomes / Nava depending on the matchup; 1b - Smoak (L); SS - Iglesias (R).
Bench: Nava/Gomes; D Ross; Ciriaco; Mauro Gomez;
Rotation: Buchholz, Marcum, Dempster, Doubront, Lackey.
Pen includes: Tazawaa, Uehara, Bard, Melancon, Miller, Morales; Wilson.
The real boon is the cost-controlled dynasty you've built for 2014+ for about six years:
LineUp: CF - Bradley (L); 2b - Pedroia (R); Middlebrooks (R); DH - David Ortiz (L)*; LF - Nick Swisher (S); RF - Bogaerts (R); C - Lavarnway (R); 1b - Smoak (L); SS - Iglesias (R)
Bench : Victorino (who still plays a lot); Nava; Ciricao; Ross; Gomes
Rotation: Buchholz (R); Walker (R); Doubront (L); Hultzen (L); Barnes (R); Marcum (R)
Pen: Tazawaa, RDLR, Melancon, Bard, Miller, Wilson
Top prospects still in the system: Franklin; Webster; Brentz; Cecchini; 2013 pick #7; Swihart; Owens; Britton; Workman; Morrero
I know that not all of our prospects will pan out, and maybe Sands takes Smoak's place at 1b, Brentz works out and not Bradley, so we move Bogaerts to CF; Webster becomes a back of the rotation starter while Barnes doesn't work out, etc, etc.
This team is stacked in prospects, fairly balanced, and has more money left than God to fill in with top FA players if they're available and complimentary guys if not.
*Realize it's unlikely Ortiz produces for the next 7 years. Of course, you still have guys like Sands; Brentz, etc in the system to implement a more flexible DH when he retires.
This also by the way allows Seattle to compete while Felix is in town. They have a better rotation and far better lineup, and have replaced their closer lost to LA. They also still get to hold on to Paxton, Heredia and Zunino.
While things "could" break right and the Sox compete these next two seasons, its fairly unlikely its for anything beyond the wild card spots. So you get rid of anyone that wont be on this team for 2014+ that can reasonably be traded. Feel free to crush my post, but I think this is an interesting idea to explore the new market inefficiency.
|
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 15, 2012 15:22:32 GMT -5
Call Seattle and get Jack Z on the line. Offer him our daily special of "any five prospects you want not named Bradley or Bogaerts for Felix", he will say emphatically say no, that they are planning to compete with Felix. Turn around the offer and remind him that they only have another two years before Felix is gone. Sure there are some great prospects in the pipeline, but neither Felix - nor at that point Jack Z - will likely be around to see them achieve their potential. Offer him the following package: Jon Lester, Jacoby Ellsbury, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Andrew Bailey, Ryan Kalish and Keury DeLaCruz for Taijuan Walker, Danny Hultzen, Nick Franklin and Justin Smoak. *head explodes* |
|
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Dec 15, 2012 15:38:55 GMT -5
I'm curious as to why you think that trade makes no sense from the perspective of either team.
From the perspective of the Red Sox, none of those players are likely to be here in 2014 / 2015 - when most of us expect the Sox will start being serious contenders again, possible exception of an extended Lester. From the perspective of the Mariners, they have only two more years of Felix under contract, and are further away from contending with him now than they were at the end of last year, based on the moves made by the Angels and the overall strength of Texas and Oakland.
I agree, its a huge price for the Mariners to pay, but I might assume that Jack Z is on a somewhat limited time as they haven't really gotten any better under his watch for the past several years.
Again, if there is an agreement that the thread or idea is complete nonsense, feel free to delete it mods.
|
|
|
|
Post by justen on Dec 15, 2012 16:07:27 GMT -5
I'm curious as to why you think that trade makes no sense from the perspective of either team. From the perspective of the Red Sox, none of those players are likely to be here in 2014 / 2015 - when most of us expect the Sox will start being serious contenders again, possible exception of an extended Lester. From the perspective of the Mariners, they have only two more years of Felix under contract, and are further away from contending with him now than they were at the end of last year, based on the moves made by the Angels and the overall strength of Texas and Oakland. I agree, its a huge price for the Mariners to pay, but I might assume that Jack Z is on a somewhat limited time as they haven't really gotten any better under his watch for the past several years. Again, if there is an agreement that the thread or idea is complete nonsense, feel free to delete it mods. But in your trade idea, you have them giving up pretty much their top 3 or 4 pitchers in the organization for a starter coming off a sub-par season, a closer coming off an injury riddled season, and a catcher that isn't better than below league-average. Kalish is noting more than a question mark, and De La Cruz is very likely to be a serviceable bench player at best. The Mariners aren't that stupid.... |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 15, 2012 16:17:25 GMT -5
I'll be honest: I think that that specific proposal is mostly nonsense for the reasons other posters have pointed out, but that's what this subforum is for. I don't think Zduriencik is desperate enough to pretend that adding Lester, Ellsbury, and other spare parts is enough to elevate Seattle into a playoff contender in the same division as the Angels and Rangers.
Then again, I thought Dayton Moore would be crazy to trade Myers and two other top-100-ish prospects for Shields and Davis and Kevin Towers would be crazy to trade Trevor Bauer for an all-glove shortstop prospect and spare change, so maybe I'm overestimating the intelligence of GMs.
|
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 15, 2012 16:23:45 GMT -5
I'm curious as to why you think that trade makes no sense from the perspective of either team. It makes no sense for Seattle because they're giving up extremely valuable players for... not extremely valuable players. |
|
|
|
Post by honkbal on Dec 15, 2012 16:47:26 GMT -5
Yeah, not sure why the Mariners would want to mortgage their future for the chance to spend a year as a .500 ball club in 2013.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Dec 15, 2012 16:49:34 GMT -5
Fair point, thanks guys. Again, I don't think that Jack Z is necessarily stupid, just as I don't think that Moore or AA or Towers are stupid. But I can see him making a stupid deal since he has been the GM for 4 years, has never made the playoffs, likely wont this year, and then would likely lose Felix and quite likely his job.
Oh well, again, first attempt to start a thread and it failed miserably. No harm no foul, that is why I used the sub-forum so as not to clog the main board.
*Then again, we do live in world where Ned Colletti gave up two very good prospects and a cost-controlled power hitter to take on the "untradable" deals of Josh Beckett and Carl Crawford in the Punto trade, so I can hope.
Either way, thanks for the insights, hopefully I can put that to good use in future posts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 15, 2012 18:10:18 GMT -5
I could actually see the Mariners trading Hultzen or Paxton. Both have significant questions, for example, Hultzen's sudden and strange lack of command when he barely walked anybody in college ball in a good conference (dude walked 43 guys in 48.2 innings in Triple-A - that terrifies me), and Paxton similarly had some control issues this year. Both do have significant question marks. Meanwhile, Walker had an ok year numbers wise - his prospect status stems from the fact he had an OK year in Double-A at age 19. While I'm on board with the age-advancement thing, I do think there can be times we over-hype it a bit.
Anyway, in the cases of Hultzen and Paxton, I'm not sure it's worth it for the Sox to use resources on them when they have Barnes/Webster/RDLR already. Not saying they're guaranteed to even be serviceable MLB starters, but that acquiring AA/AAA pitching talent isn't the best use of resources at the moment.
I still think that deal is Crazy from the M's point of view, but as alluded to above, I'd have thought similarly about the KC-TB deal before it happened. To me, the one flaw in it is that there are just too many players - quantity is being used to make up for quality. Take out three of the guys on the Sox' end and add someone of more value and then maybe it gets more realistic perhaps?
|
|
|
|
Post by alapierre on Dec 15, 2012 21:34:21 GMT -5
Jon Daniels is certainly a GM I'd say may be looking and willing to make a substantial trade. I don't think he's on the hot seat by any means but his team is in need of an upgrade after losing Hamilton and missing out on others. A name I hope being explored is Leonys Martin for Ellsbury. I think Martin may have greater value than a potential draft pick.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Dec 16, 2012 9:14:06 GMT -5
Thanks Chris and Ala, great points there. Maybe more along the lines that the idea is right, but the specific players involved might not make sense.
I also had thought about Texas after having missed out on Grienke, Hamilton, apparently Dickey and Upton, they might make some sense to target as well, but agree that Daniels has (I would think) much more leash than Jack Z at this point.
I would love to make an Ellsbury for Martin trade, though I don't know if one year of Ellsbury would be worth it to them. Would they consider Ellsbury and Lester for Martin, Olt and Buckel. They were rumored to be discussing Olt and Buckel for Dickey, and we wouldn't be going after their top positional (Profar) or pitching (Perez) prospect in that scenario - might make it a bit more tenable.
For the record, this isn't something where I dislike Lester, personally, I think he will bounce back very well to the pitcher he has always been - and as this illustrates is a better bet in the AL than the reigning NL Cy Young, seriously. I just think that we should look to move almost anyone who wont be here when the crop of kids is ready, and maximizing assets that will be around for that is what the rest of this offseason should be about.
|
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Dec 16, 2012 12:54:48 GMT -5
I've been surprized by some of the big deals made in the last year . I do think there are more GM's out there looking to make a big move. If the sox want to get the kind of return you suggested with Seattle bigpapi, I think they'd have to include some of the top prospects with Ellsbury. I really don't like to see the top prospects traded but after seeing the KC/Tampa deal and the Punto trade , there might be trade out there worth doing a big risk/big reward type deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Dec 18, 2012 13:53:27 GMT -5
I've been surprized by some of the big deals made in the last year . I do think there are more GM's out there looking to make a big move. If the sox want to get the kind of return you suggested with Seattle bigpapi, I think they'd have to include some of the top prospects with Ellsbury. I really don't like to see the top prospects traded but after seeing the KC/Tampa deal and the Punto trade , there might be trade out there worth doing a big risk/big reward type deal. Toronto just traded two top draw prospects for Dickey. Does that affect what other teams expect for quality starting pitching? Still think we should call Sandy A and start dialogue on a blockbuster that somehow involves Harvey. |
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 18, 2012 16:31:30 GMT -5
I don't like to speak in definites, but I will here. The Mets will definitely not be trading Harvey.
Alderson is a very good GM. He just traded the Cy Young award winner for two top prospects. Why would he trade a fantastic young arm? The Mets are clearly building for the future now. Also, what could the Red Sox possibly offer in return? Looking at the roster constructions, I can't see a single mutually beneficial trade. Both teams are trying to construct their rosters in a way to help themselves compete long-term.
Alderson isn't really on the hot seat, either. The Mets didn't hire him to begin the rebuilding process without seeing it through.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 19, 2012 10:27:05 GMT -5
James has it nailed. The idea that Alderson has his his job on the line is absurd. For those who don't know, this is the true father of Moneyball, the man who decided there was untapped value in some of the neglected aspects of baseball stats. Beane picked up on those ideas at the feet of Alderson and carried them to their logical conclusion when the latter left Oakland. The Mets were lucky to get him and he is not there to trade off the pool of young talent he's been so carefully collecting. That notion is right up there with the idea that John Frum will someday return to replenish the cupboards of the cargo cults in the South Pacific. It isn't going to happen. |
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Dec 21, 2012 16:56:44 GMT -5
I would love to make an Ellsbury for Martin trade, though I don't know if one year of Ellsbury would be worth it to them. Would the Phillies or the Rangers be interested in Ellsbury? The Phillies have Revere in CF, but the corners look weak and the Rangers need to replace Hamilton. I can't imagine Ellsbury has much value to either team and maybe the best play is to keep him and then hope he rebounds since 2013 is an odd number year. But if either team comes calling with a decent enough proposal, would Charrington move him? |
|
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Dec 22, 2012 9:48:33 GMT -5
[/quote]
Would the Phillies or the Rangers be interested in Ellsbury?
[/quote]
I would have to assume at this point the Phillies no, for most of the reasons you alluded to - and also the rumors that they weren't interested in Ellsbury earlier in the off-season. The Rangers could certainly be a possibility I'd think.
We did hear some talk of an Ellsbury for Derek Holland swap a while back. While I don't think Ellsbury for Andrus was ever terribly realistic (and even less so now with Drew in the mix) I would love to see what prospect(s) you could get from Texas for him.
I would assume that Mike Olt would be too much to hope for, but maybe Cody Buckel or Martin Perez - I would say more likely Buckel unless they have soured on Perez at all based on PCL numbers and his short stint in the majors last year - which would seem unlikely.
|
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jan 7, 2013 14:01:52 GMT -5
[quote author=bigpapismangosalsa board=trade thread=329 post=8352 time=1356187713We did hear some talk of an Ellsbury for Derek Holland swap a while back. While I don't think Ellsbury for Andrus was ever terribly realistic (and even less so now with Drew in the mix) I would love to see what prospect(s) you could get from Texas for him.
I would assume that Mike Olt would be too much to hope for, but maybe Cody Buckel or Martin Perez - I would say more likely Buckel unless they have soured on Perez at all based on PCL numbers and his short stint in the majors last year - which would seem unlikely. [/quote]
Does Texas need to add something else before opening day to spruce up their lineup?
|
|
|
