Let's get crazy (risky acquisitions and offseason plans)

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
the problem with flipping willie calhoun and other prospects for Marcell Ozuna is that that prospect package will need to include Devers for the Marlins to even listen. I would argue that a half season of Darvish in a playoff push is probably more valuable than JBJ. The Rangers are closer to a complete teardown than to tweaking for a playoff run.

Shit, the yankees can offer Clint Frazier and some low top 10 prospect of theirs for Ozuna and that would be a way more appealing offer for the Marlins. Some of the trade proposals being offered up here assume that no other team will be competing for these assets. If Ozuna is on the trade block, loads of teams will be lining up, and their packages will be way more appealing than "Willie Calhoun and others".
I agree in theory regarding competing teams being able to trump a Sox offer if he were even available, but he only has two more arbitration years and is going to get expensive pretty soon.

I don't think two seasons would require Devers or a blue chipper in this hitters market. Top 10 prospects don't get moved very often for non pitchers but there's not a huge sample. Brinson+ got dealt for Lucroy in 2016, but he's a catcher and not an outfielder.
 
Last edited:

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,723
Miami (oh, Miami!)
Crazy. Hmm. The best chips are: Sale, Devers, Mookie, and possibly Price.

Devers to the Marlins for a mildly subsidized Stanton.
Mookie to the Brewers for Travis Shaw.
Sale for a #2 and a #4 starter, both with control and upside. (Don't ask me who).
Or Price for a #2 FA in a couple of years type.

That gives you a franchise player (Stanton) in the OF, who can transition to DH/1B. 3B is plugged at low cost/control for a player who is headed to arb/FA and might do better in a small market.

Rotation is Price, #2, Pom, Porcello, #4. (Consider Wright gone and E-Rod as (hopefully) a Price replacement when he opts out.)

Or it's Sale, #2, Pom, Porcello, Revolving Door.
 

Oppo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2009
1,576
Devers/Travis for Freeman and subsidized JJ
JBJ/Kelly/Groome for Jay/Schwarber
Re-sign Nunez
Re-sign Rajai
Sign JD

C Vaz/Leon
1b JD
2b Pedroia
SS Xander
3b Freeman
LF Benny
CF Jay
RF Betts
DH Schwarber

Hanley (DH/1b)
Nunez (INF)
Rajai (OF)
Catcher

Xander
Benny
Betts
Freeman
JD
Schwarber
Catcher
Pedroia
Jay
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
the problem with flipping willie calhoun and other prospects for Marcell Ozuna is that that prospect package will need to include Devers for the Marlins to even listen. I would argue that a half season of Darvish in a playoff push is probably more valuable than JBJ. The Rangers are closer to a complete teardown than to tweaking for a playoff run.

Shit, the yankees can offer Clint Frazier and some low top 10 prospect of theirs for Ozuna and that would be a way more appealing offer for the Marlins. Some of the trade proposals being offered up here assume that no other team will be competing for these assets. If Ozuna is on the trade block, loads of teams will be lining up, and their packages will be way more appealing than "Willie Calhoun and others".
Wow -- we are total opposites on most of what you said. That's okay. I just threw this out there. But imo your post undervalues JBJ by a lot, underrated Devers by a lot (to even mention him in a package for Ozuna), underrated the Rangers attempt for a playoff run, underrated the Marlins desperation of Ozuna reverting back to prior years (which means you are over-valuing a corner outfielder who has had one terric year of hitting) all-the-while the Marlins are in a serious/enormous payroll crunch.

Anyhow okay if other teams can offer more. We'll see what the Marlins get eventually. If they hold onot him this year and he reverts back, that salary takes another jump. He's already at $10.9m enterign 2018.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
I still fail to fully understand the supporting logic that goes into these trades targeting Ozuna and Bour.

So people don't have the Marlins trading Stanton and that monster contract hanging over their small market heads this winter, which mostly seems centered around a belief of him being the guy they want to build their franchise around. Yet the best way to project them doing that is by trading off a couple of great cost-controlled pieces around him and already in place for his prime years, which somehow doesn't end up defeating the whole purpose of keeping that contract around?

I get the always present obsession with the fairly young, great fit for our own needs, and reasonably priced with some control trade possibility....but that guy certainly isn't coming out of Miami this winter imo.
1-- Huh? You realize the Marlins want to cut payroll by a ton, don't you? They want to cut it by $30-40M even if they don't trade Stanton. They want to trade Stanton. Those "people" you are referring to are probably figuring the Marlins can't get rid of him. The Marlins don't want to build their franchise around Stanton.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/derek-jeter-cut-marlins-payroll-55m-report-article-1.3466664

2--- Based on the Marlins wanting to get so low, a guy like Ozuna and now that Bour is entering arbitration are not great cost-controlled pieces for this particular team.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,620
Marcell Ozuna is 27 and has more career WAR than JBJ. If Ozuna is traded, he is getting a top 20 prospect. The Rangers are loaded with aging veterans and mediocre younger talent. I wouldnt be surprised if Stanton and Ozuna get traded, we are just not particularly well stocked with prospects to acquire them
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
Marcell Ozuna is 27 and has more career WAR than JBJ. If Ozuna is traded, he is getting a top 20 prospect. The Rangers are loaded with aging veterans and mediocre younger talent. I wouldnt be surprised if Stanton and Ozuna get traded, we are just not particularly well stocked with prospects to acquire them
Okay we can agree to disagree. First off- I didn't say JBJ and Ozuna were the same so I'm not sure why you are comparing WAR. Second, I don't think Ozuna is a lock to being as good as you refer to. When you suggested that the Sox would need to package Devers for him. Well -- if you are right-- I would pass. Third, regarding the Rangers, we see what happened with Minnesota, Arizona and Milwaukee. While Milwaukee didn't make it, they were in it -- and maybe "just one more move. . . "
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
1-- Huh? You realize the Marlins want to cut payroll by a ton, don't you? They want to cut it by $30-40M even if they don't trade Stanton. They want to trade Stanton. Those "people" you are referring to are probably figuring the Marlins can't get rid of him. The Marlins don't want to build their franchise around Stanton.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/derek-jeter-cut-marlins-payroll-55m-report-article-1.3466664

2--- Based on the Marlins wanting to get so low, a guy like Ozuna and now that Bour is entering arbitration are not great cost-controlled pieces for this particular team.
They'll cut payroll when they trade Stanton off this winter for pre-arby MLB type pieces they can plug right back in. The rest of that "we need to get payroll really low" is more posturing leading up to that very controversial point then anything else imo.

It's a new ownership scenario. Color me extremely skeptical that they are coming in with some long term who-cares-about-winning-games reset/rebuild plan, and completely tear down an already young and upper 70's wins team just to save a couple million dollars on the 2018 season. Or because they just so happen to have a few guys that would match up great with what the Red Sox need atm.
 
Last edited:

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,620
Okay we can agree to disagree. First off- I didn't say JBJ and Ozuna were the same so I'm not sure why you are comparing WAR. Second, I don't think Ozuna is a lock to being as good as you refer to. When you suggested that the Sox would need to package Devers for him. Well -- if you are right-- I would pass. Third, regarding the Rangers, we see what happened with Minnesota, Arizona and Milwaukee. While Milwaukee didn't make it, they were in it -- and maybe "just one more move. . . "
Sorry I had just woken up and probably didnt make my point well enough. Marcell Ozuna has been a more successful player than JBJ, at least as successful. If I had to bet who would have the better season next year, I would probably bet on the 27 year old that just had an OPS of .924 than the 28 year old with the .726 OPS. I would disagree with you on the value of JBJ as a trade chip and the relative value of Ozuna.

If the Marlins are trading Ozuna, they are going into a full on rebuild. They will probably only be interested in prospects who have very little time in the majors or none at all. Ozuna can play all three OF positions and would be coveted by a lot of teams that would be able to offer that controllable talent for him.

I think the position that makes the most sense for the Red Sox is to sign Martinez as a DH with the ability to spell LF and 1B occasionally, in order to give the kids in the OF a break and to limit Hanley's PA if he is unhealthy/unproductive.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
They'll cut payroll when they trade Stanton off this winter for pre-arby MLB type pieces they can plug right back in. The rest of that "we need to get payroll really low" is more posturing leading up to that very controversial point then anything else imo.

It's a new ownership scenario. Color me extremely skeptical that they are coming in with some long term who-cares-about-winning-games reset/rebuild plan, and completely tear down an already young and upper 70's wins team just to save a couple million dollars on the 2018 season. Or because they just so happen to have a few guys that would match up great with what the Red Sox need atm.
I made this trade proposal just for talking purposes and quite a bit of it is based on the article - also another article below saying same thing. Previously, I responded to your point in bold:

"which mostly seems centered around a belief of him being the guy they want to build their franchise around. Yet the best way to project them doing that is by trading off a couple of great cost-controlled pieces around him and already in place for his prime years, which somehow doesn't end up defeating the whole purpose of keeping that contract around?"

The point is-- the Marlins don't want to keep Stanton around. They want to get as low as $55m trading Stanton. They want about $80m the article says. With respect to you, I'm skeptical of your take on this. You're calling guys like Ozuna and Bour (entering arb years) as cost control guys as though they were Red Sox. TO the Marlins- at least Ozuna - is not cost controlled. You further suggested the Marlins want to build around Stanton. That's not the case. I proposed in-line with the article. Yet you seemed "taken aback a bit" that I even propose trading Ozuna and Bour.

http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/news/derek-jeters-ownership-group-plans-to-cut-marlins-payroll-drastically/1nscmopdkunuj1d2txik6xsg1y
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
Sorry I had just woken up and probably didnt make my point well enough. (1) Marcell Ozuna has been a more successful player than JBJ, at least as successful. If I had to bet who would have the better season next year, I would probably bet on the 27 year old that just had an OPS of .924 than the 28 year old with the .726 OPS. I would disagree with you on the value of JBJ as a trade chip and the relative value of Ozuna.

(2) If the Marlins are trading Ozuna, they are going into a full on rebuild. (3) They will probably only be interested in prospects who have very little time in the majors or none at all. (4) Ozuna can play all three OF positions (5) and would be coveted by a lot of teams that would be able to offer that controllable talent for him.

(6) I think the position that makes the most sense for the Red Sox is to sign Martinez as a DH with the ability to spell LF and 1B occasionally, in order to give the kids in the OF a break and to limit Hanley's PA if he is unhealthy/unproductive.
1-- I agree. But I didn't say JBJ was better or as good as Ozuna. In fact, I proposed trading JBJ to get a prospect or prospects then trade other players on the farm plus what the trade yields to get Ozuna. So I am not saying 1 for 1.

2-- The Marlins are going in full rebuild mode. I've got 2 links above and you can google for more.

3-- I proposed what you're suggesting. Willie Calhoun, anything additional you get for JBJ if you do, other current sox prospects, and trade some other bullpen to get some lower level prospects that would add to the package.

4-- From what I see I don't think he is a cf anymore. Thus a knock on his current value.

5-- He's only had 1 superior year hitting. In 2016 and 2014 pretty good years but not superior. He's so far shown to be a good hitter (but not super) whose defense has dropped that he's no longer a cf. He's in higher arbitration numbers now and is a free agent in 2020. To trade top talent for a guy who has had one super year-- you had better be sure that 2017 wasn't his peak. Plus he is gone by 202 while his defense looks like it's in decline. Man small and mid-market teams would be taking a big gamble on him. I guess it comes down to what degree do we think he is coveted. I'm passing on him easily if Marlins are looking for Devers plus prospects. I would hang up the phone on Jeter.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
I think the position that makes the most sense for the Red Sox is to sign Martinez as a DH with the ability to spell LF and 1B occasionally, in order to give the kids in the OF a break and to limit Hanley's PA if he is unhealthy/unproductive.


Anyhow I like your above with a couple of more moves.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
1-- I agree. But I didn't say JBJ was better or as good as Ozuna. In fact, I proposed trading JBJ to get a prospect or prospects then trade other players on the farm plus what the trade yields to get Ozuna. So I am not saying 1 for 1.

4-- From what I see I don't think he is a cf anymore. Thus a knock on his current value.
He is only in LF because of Christian Yelich being better. His defense has rated above average in CF in the past, so he can probably still play there or RF for a team acquiring him.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
I made this trade proposal just for talking purposes and quite a bit of it is based on the article - also another article below saying same thing. Previously, I responded to your point in bold:

"which mostly seems centered around a belief of him being the guy they want to build their franchise around. Yet the best way to project them doing that is by trading off a couple of great cost-controlled pieces around him and already in place for his prime years, which somehow doesn't end up defeating the whole purpose of keeping that contract around?"

The point is-- the Marlins don't want to keep Stanton around. They want to get as low as $55m trading Stanton. They want about $80m the article says. With respect to you, I'm skeptical of your take on this. You're calling guys like Ozuna and Bour (entering arb years) as cost control guys as though they were Red Sox. TO the Marlins- at least Ozuna - is not cost controlled. You further suggested the Marlins want to build around Stanton. That's not the case. I proposed in-line with the article. Yet you seemed "taken aback a bit" that I even propose trading Ozuna and Bour.

http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/news/derek-jeters-ownership-group-plans-to-cut-marlins-payroll-drastically/1nscmopdkunuj1d2txik6xsg1y
I never said I thought the Marlins want to build around Stanton. Quite the opposite actually, here and in other threads I've posted on the matter. I just fail to buy into the proposed possibility that an ownership who just spent $1.2 billion buying the team is going to immediately shred the roster/payroll in the manner you suggest after-the-fact, much less start their run by conceding any possible chance they'd have to *not* watch their investment take gigantic leap backwards. Sweating Stanton's contract as a whole is one thing. Going in to desperation "we have no choice!" budget cutting mode over that combined Ozuma/Bour salary total on 2018 is quite another.

Just to note btw, the supporting source of that $55m figure and gloom-and-doom article itself is an "unidentified potential investor" citing a supposed briefing that took place sometime before September 3rd. personally, I'm not putting a lot of speculation stock on it's current accuracy atm.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
He is only in LF because of Christian Yelich being better. His defense has rated above average in CF in the past, so he can probably still play there or RF for a team acquiring him.
Not what I saw from baseballref, unless I'm reading it wrong? It looks like in each of the last 3 years he is saving runs at a negative when he plays cf. It looks like this year he had good overall numbers from fielding because he played a lot less cf? And with his negative baserunning the past 3 years, looks like he is losing a step?

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/o/ozunama01.shtml
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
Not what I saw from baseballref, unless I'm reading it wrong? It looks like in each of the last 3 years he is saving runs at a negative when he plays cf. It looks like this year he had good overall numbers from fielding because he played a lot less cf? And with his negative baserunning the past 3 years, looks like he is losing a step?

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/o/ozunama01.shtml
I was going by Fangraphs - since 3 of 4 of his defensive seasons in CF were above average but it's possible he is below average now. Maybe he bulked up too much.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=10324&position=OF
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
I never said I thought the Marlins want to build around Stanton. Quite the opposite actually, here and in other threads I've posted on the matter. I just fail to buy into the proposed possibility that an ownership who just spent $1.2 billion buying the team is going to immediately shred the roster/payroll in the manner you suggest after-the-fact, much less start their run by conceding any possible chance they'd have to *not* watch their investment take gigantic leap backwards. Sweating Stanton's contract as a whole is one thing. Going in to desperation "we have no choice!" budget cutting mode over that combined Ozuma/Bour salary total on 2018 is quite another.

Just to note btw, the supporting source of that $55m figure and gloom-and-doom article itself is an "unidentified potential investor" citing a supposed briefing that took place sometime before September 3rd. personally, I'm not putting a lot of speculation stock on it's current accuracy atm.
How many other links do I need to send that states the Marlins are looking to cut payroll big time? This one says $90m. Dropping the payroll to $90m.


https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/10/marlins-rumor-trade-giancarlo-stanton-payroll-90-million.html

"Chief executive officer Derek Jeter suggested at last week’s introductory press conference that the Marlins’ new ownership group may have to make some “unpopular” decisions for the long-term well-being of the franchise, and it appears that a fairly dramatic cut of the payroll is in order. Clark Spencer of the Miami Herald reports that the Marlins are aiming to trim their payroll back to about $90MM — a decrease of $25MM from its 2017 Opening Day mark and nearly $50MM south of where Jason Martinez of MLBTR/Roster Resource projects their 2018 payroll to land at present (once league-minimum players are added to the bill)."

Secondly if you didn't say that you thought the Marlins wanted to build around the Stanton- then what does this mean?

which mostly seems centered around a belief of him being the guy they want to build their franchise around. Yet the best way to project them doing that is by trading off a couple of great cost-controlled pieces around him and already in place for his prime years, which somehow doesn't end up defeating the whole purpose of keeping that contract around?"
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
Secondly if you didn't say that you thought the Marlins wanted to build around the Stanton- then what does this mean?

which mostly seems centered around a belief of him being the guy they want to build their franchise around. Yet the best way to project them doing that is by trading off a couple of great cost-controlled pieces around him and already in place for his prime years, which somehow doesn't end up defeating the whole purpose of keeping that contract around?"
Why do you keep insisting on cutting out the rest of what was stated there? Context is key (you also aren't the only one to bring up those possibility names either btw). It's also good that you are now going with the better source material in that link, although I don't fault you for seemingly buying more into the other one since there is a pretty significant difference there between $55m and $90m.

Let me be as clear as possible on this I guess. I believe the Marlins are going to trade Stanton this winter (with a somewhat decent chance he ends up a Yankee at that). I also believe that ownership will indeed make a reasonable effort beyond that to *try* and cut some additional payroll where they can. I don't believe any targeted effort there will include shipping off Ozuna or Bour on top of Stanton, even if it ultimately means that they don't meet some $90m estimated payroll goal.
 

Kielty's Last Pitch

New Member
Oct 6, 2017
118
I believe the Marlins are going to trade Stanton this winter (with a somewhat decent chance he ends up a Yankee at that).
Why would the Yankees trade talent for Stanton when they can possibly sign Harper a year from now?

Honestly, I don't see the Yankees getting back into a record-breaking contract for a position player when they've fought so hard to get out from under huge longterm contracts in the past. They have publicly acknowledged the huge longterm contracts was a bad approach. I think they are genuine in their desire to get under the LT next season, and they'll need a ton of money to improve their starting rotation and then eventually extend their current young talent.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
Why do you keep insisting on cutting out the rest of what was stated there? Context is key (you also aren't the only one to bring up those possibility names either btw). It's also good that you are now going with the better source material in that link, although I don't fault you for seemingly buying more into the other one since there is a pretty significant difference there between $55m and $90m.

Let me be as clear as possible on this I guess. I believe the Marlins are going to trade Stanton this winter (with a somewhat decent chance he ends up a Yankee at that). I also believe that ownership will indeed make a reasonable effort beyond that to *try* and cut some additional payroll where they can. I don't believe any targeted effort there will include shipping off Ozuna or Bour on top of Stanton, even if it ultimately means that they don't meet some $90m estimated payroll goal.
Context? Are you a a politician? That was practically your whole paragraph. Read the underline above and the underline below. You know what. Not worth going at it with you. And you are making it sound like I have to send you a link. Who are you? I only sent you a link as a courtesy. Your paragraph below was specific. Stop hiding behind it. Just so we don't deteriorate into insults. It's best to put you on ignore and hopefully you will do the same with me. Your initial post was clear in my view. A belief the team wants to build their franchise around Stanton. Not what you are trying to save face with now. If I'm wrong-- great. And you could believe you were right. But we don't have to reply to one another any more so it's no big deal.

which mostly seems centered around a belief of him being the guy they want to build their franchise around. Yet the best way to project them doing that is by trading off a couple of great cost-controlled pieces around him and already in place for his prime years, which somehow doesn't end up defeating the whole purpose of keeping that contract around?"
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,475
Somewhere
The Marlins can probably pare their payroll without moving Stanton. They have a plus-plus value guy in Dee Gordon and they could probably staple Prado or Volquez as dead money guys. A move like that would shave $25+ million off their 2018 obligations.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
Wow. Ok, let's try this again i guess:

If my initial post confused you (that you still didn't quote it it's entirely btw), which I was purposely presenting as a legitimate question (hence the question mark at the end) to people in general who keep speculating a trade or trades coming out of Miami (granted, you went on afterwards to be the first I've seen claiming that they'll be looking to trade everybody and including Stanton), I thought I made my own individual stance on Stanton pretty clear in my very first sentence of that very first reply back after you asked if i realized the Marlins wanted to cut payroll:

They'll cut payroll when they trade Stanton off this winter for pre-arby MLB type pieces they can plug right back in.
The links were appreciated and never demanded too btw. Again, just pointing out that I see second one of those carrying a lot more weight here then the first.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
Why would the Yankees trade talent for Stanton when they can possibly sign Harper a year from now?

Honestly, I don't see the Yankees getting back into a record-breaking contract for a position player when they've fought so hard to get out from under huge longterm contracts in the past. They have publicly acknowledged the huge longterm contracts was a bad approach. I think they are genuine in their desire to get under the LT next season, and they'll need a ton of money to improve their starting rotation and then eventually extend their current young talent.
For starters, being in love with the surface concept of getting under the cap and actually following through with a positioned plan that gets you there this winter isn't the same thing. I personally don't see Tanaka opting out, and probably will need to see them take a more conservative approach following this season before I'll believe that follow through happens.

As for the why not wait on Harper, Snodgrass'Muff made pretty convincing argument in the Stanton thread on that imo. The potential difference in commitment money involved. Not to mention a possible outcome where they pass on Stanton now, Machado has another "not sure I want to be the one investing so heavy in that" season, and they don't actually get Harper latter.

(Plus, and obviously to a much much lesser extent, my doom-and-gloom side has been calling the Stanton-for-Judge shocker swap of this off-season to my work friends ever since Jeter made me think he's serious about moving him. Marlins get the needed name/perceived upside (who goes on to Chris Carter v2016 it up), Yankees get the real deal (who goes on to win the 2018 AL MVP), and we all get to spend the year hearing how much of a sell high genius Cashman is :))
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Two and a half full seasons. 3500 innings in total. Positive value. Safe to say he isn't terrible.
Yeah, he's got about 2000 innings played in center over the last three seasons, where something around 3600 would be stable sample, so it's not completely insignificant. And he's still young enough that it's likely he hasn't seen much, if any decline yet. So I'd probably put money down on him still being about an average defender at the position for the next 2 or 3 seasons. I'd probably rather go with Benintendi if he were to end up in Boston (assuming JBJ is gone in this scenario), though Ozuna likely isn't more than a step or two behind him.
 
Last edited:

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
870
Maryland
1. There's no freakin' way Cashman trades Judge and his cost controlled contract for Stanton and his exorbitant deal, unless Cashman knows that Judge is secretly an ax murderer or something.
2. I seriously doubt that the Yankees will be in on Stanton given (a) reports that they want to stay under the LT threshold and get a needed reset, and (b) that they probably want to save their money for next year when Harper and Machado are available. Sure, the Yankees have a wealth of prospects and could make a deal, but why would they? Would you?

Whether the Sox should go after Stanton depends on a couple of things:
1. What's the acquisition cost? Given that the Marlins primary motivation is salary reduction, I doubt they will want to eat much or any of what's owed, which will obviously reduce their return. And what other teams are interested that can take on that contract? The team I hear about most is the Phillies, but there's also some question as to whether Stanton would waive his NTC to go there. So we don't really know how much competition the Sox would have, which also greatly affects the acquisition cost.
2. Can they a sign JD Martinez, and at what cost? It's not a given that we can sign him - it's been reported that he liked Arizona, and might prefer to stay there. We might have to be the highest bidder to have a chance to get him, but what would that take? If that means 6/150, is he worth that? It might depend on what the acquisition cost is for Stanton, or the cost of other "big bat" alternatives.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
1. There's no freakin' way Cashman trades Judge and his cost controlled contract for Stanton and his exorbitant deal, unless Cashman knows that Judge is secretly an ax murderer or something.
2. I seriously doubt that the Yankees will be in on Stanton given (a) reports that they want to stay under the LT threshold and get a needed reset, and (b) that they probably want to save their money for next year when Harper and Machado are available. Sure, the Yankees have a wealth of prospects and could make a deal, but why would they? Would you?
Yep. Because I'd rather have Stanton for a decade at around 30 million than Harper for a decade at around 40 million. IMO, the injury risks are pretty similar, so that 10 million dollar difference in AAV is fairly enormous. Plus, the Yankees are approaching the same "problem" the Sox had in 2015. A loaded system with a loaded major league roster and the top prospects don't all line up with the remaining holes. So they'll need to convert some of that prospect capital into major league production via trade anyway. May as well preempt that and the 2018-2019 winter free agent market in one move.

If they can make a deal with Miami without including Gleyber Torres and all of their top pitching prospects, I think they should do it. And I think they probably can if they take on the entire contract.
 

BrooklynDog45

Member
SoSH Member
May 30, 2003
485
New Jersey
In a Stanton trade with the Red Sox would Miami take back Rusney Castillo (3yrs $37.6 million left per BB Ref) to help offset some money? Of course along with other pieces.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
Miami might be the least illogical landing spot for Castillo, but that certainly doesn't mean they'd want him. Including him in any deal is a clear net negative, so it would only increase the prospect cost.

As for Yankees - Stanton or Harper - what are the LT/CBA implications for not getting under the limit? Wouldn't the likely penalty significantly cut into the $10M expected difference in salaries between Judge's current monster deal and Harper's even greater one? (Sorry, I'm too lazy/busy to look up the details and apply them to Yankee speculation; wondering if someone else already has.)
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,745
As for Yankees - Stanton or Harper - what are the LT/CBA implications for not getting under the limit? Wouldn't the likely penalty significantly cut into the $10M expected difference in salaries between Judge's current monster deal and Harper's even greater one? (Sorry, I'm too lazy/busy to look up the details and apply them to Yankee speculation; wondering if someone else already has.)
You mean Stanton in 'current monster deal', not Judge, but what NY is trying to do is get under $197M this year to reset the penalty rate, then they will spend big next offseason if they think it makes sense. So Stanton to NY isn't happening unless it is for Ellsbury plus prospects, which I still don't think makes sense for either team but at least it's more possible.

Also not that it matters a huge amount but Stanton is a RHH, same as Judge and Sanchez and Bird and Torres. Didi and Bird are LHH, but NY would still prefer a LHH (like Harper) to balance things a bit if they did go after a superstar, all else being relatively equal of course.

I'd personally put the odds of NY getting Stanton at 0.00001 percent, Machado after 2018 at maybe 20 percent (very dependent on how Torres and Andujar do next year) and Harper after 2018 at 40-50 percent (he or Judge would have to move from RF to LF or DH and LF in Yankee Stadium is big but it seems workable if they are set on adding his bat).
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
Yep. Because I'd rather have Stanton for a decade at around 30 million than Harper for a decade at around 40 million. IMO, the injury risks are pretty similar, so that 10 million dollar difference in AAV is fairly enormous. Plus, the Yankees are approaching the same "problem" the Sox had in 2015. A loaded system with a loaded major league roster and the top prospects don't all line up with the remaining holes. So they'll need to convert some of that prospect capital into major league production via trade anyway. May as well preempt that and the 2018-2019 winter free agent market in one move.

If they can make a deal with Miami without including Gleyber Torres and all of their top pitching prospects, I think they should do it. And I think they probably can if they take on the entire contract.
I think another general aspect that people need to take more into account there is that outside the obvious sell on it's surface, getting under the LT for one season does not essentially present an infinite amount of pro vs con value on a comparative level.

Generally speaking, the Yankees won't be shooting to go under the LT next year simply based on some cross it off the bucket list factor. Given where their roster sits right now, and depending on just how all-in their potential mindset is on adding that franchise type bat to that current mix, I personally just don't see it being 100% clear cut that the LT's penalty concerns wins out over everything else there.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
Yeah, he's got about 2000 innings played in center over the last three seasons, where something around 3600 would be stable sample, so it's not completely insignificant. And he's still young enough that it's likely he hasn't seen much, if any decline yet. So I'd probably put money down on him still being about an average defender at the position for the next 2 or 3 seasons. I'd probably rather go with Benintendi if he were to end up in Boston (assuming JBJ is gone in this scenario), though Ozuna likely isn't more than a step or two behind him.
I was just going by his prior 3 years of over 3k in CF since he was almost exclusively in LF this year.

The non-statistical part of it is that he and Yelich came up around the same time, and Christian played CF and LF in the minors, but they opted to go with Ozuna in center in the majors until this season.
They swapped this year, so maybe he has lost a step.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
I was just going by his prior 3 years of over 3k in CF since he was almost exclusively in LF this year.

The non-statistical part of it is that he and Yelich came up around the same time, and Christian played CF and LF in the minors, but they opted to go with Ozuna in center in the majors until this season.
They swapped this year, so maybe he has lost a step.
It's also possible that Ozuna is exactly as good defensively as they expected and has been consistent, but that Yelich is better than they thought he'd be and simply jumped ahead on the depth chart.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,393
This thread gives us the freedom to talk about insane ideas that otherwise would be frowned upon mightily on the main board, right?

So here goes. My assumptions are:

(1) David Price is going to be fine and effective next year.
(2) Pomeranz isn't a mirage, but is a solid SP.
(3) Porcello bounces back, or at least they have confidence he will.
(4) They are concerned about Sale's pattern of end-of-year fade.
(5) They are needing to add a big bat.
(6) Money is a factor here moving forward. Maybe not in 2018, but down the road. IOW, they may feel they can't keep both Price and Sale at market rates, because then they'll be spending $60 million a year for two starting pitchers, and they can't afford that if they also want to keep Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley, etc. So they will need to move either Price or Sale in this scenario, and Sale seems to be the guy with FAR more trade value.

Ok, here we go...

1. Trade for Matt Adams of the Braves. He takes over 1b. Atlanta already has Freeman at 1b and really can't fit Adams in for many plate appearances. 20 hr in 339 ab last year, career ops+ of 111. Lefty. Better hitter than Moreland. Just 28. Cost-controlled.

2. Trade Sale to Minnesota for Jose Berrios, Eduardo Escobar, and a top tier prospect. Sale gives them an enormous upgrade at SP, and they're the kind of team that could use it - they're already a playoff team, but now they need to look to contend for the division title. Berrios is young and solid for sure, but is certainly no Chris Sale. For the Sox it would be a downgrade in the rotation, but Berrios probably is the kind of pitcher who could last here a while. Just 23 and cost-controlled. Escobar is a quality IF that can play 2b, 3b, and SS. Replaces Nunez. He has only one year left on his deal, but has plenty of pop (21 homers in 457 ab this past year). Can spell Pedroia, X, or Devers.

3. Trade JBJ and sign JD Martinez. Martinez moves to LF, Benny to CF. Massive upgrade in power.

Lineup:
C - Vazquez
1b - Adams
2b - Pedroia
3b - Devers
SS - Bogaerts
LF - Martinez
CF - Benintendi
RF - Betts
DH - Hanley

Bench: Swihart, Escobar, Holt, Travis, 5th OF

Rotation: Price, Pomeranz, Porcello, Berrios, Fister (?)/Rodriguez
Bullpen: the usual suspects, with hopefully Thornburg and Smith there for the whole season
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
So in a potential scenario that sees JD Martinez's market get walk away stupid, but where you still end up looking to shop Bradley this winter, can a 1 year rebound flyer on CarGo (where you are still aiming to keep the get-back-under-the-LT next year hope alive) end up making any gamble sense as part of 2 player combo offensive upgrade?

Or is his age, the first half of 2017, and that horrid road split just too scary overall?
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,393
So in a potential scenario that sees JD Martinez's market get walk away stupid, but where you still end up looking to shop Bradley this winter, can a 1 year rebound flyer on CarGo (where you are still aiming to keep the get-back-under-the-LT next year hope alive) end up making any gamble sense as part of 2 player combo offensive upgrade?

Or is his age, the first half of 2017, and that horrid road split just too scary overall?
I wouldn't be looking to move JBJ. I'd be willing to move him if that enables the Sox to acquire Martinez. Trading JBJ to pick up Carlos Gonzalez doesn't seem to be much of an improvement.

Last two seasons....
JBJ: .257/.337/.447/.784, 105 ops+, 8.1 bWAR
CarGo: .282/.345/.469/.813, 100 ops+, 2.1 bWAR

Despite Gonzalez' numbers being better as raw numbers, Bradley's numbers are better when you take into consideration park factors, and his overall game has been much more valuable than Gonzo's.

Long story short: No, I wouldn't trade away Bradley if the replacement is Gonzalez (with a view that Gonzo would be an upgrade).
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
I wouldn't be looking to move JBJ. I'd be willing to move him if that enables the Sox to acquire Martinez. Trading JBJ to pick up Carlos Gonzalez doesn't seem to be much of an improvement.

Last two seasons....
JBJ: .257/.337/.447/.784, 105 ops+, 8.1 bWAR
CarGo: .282/.345/.469/.813, 100 ops+, 2.1 bWAR

Despite Gonzalez' numbers being better as raw numbers, Bradley's numbers are better when you take into consideration park factors, and his overall game has been much more valuable than Gonzo's.

Long story short: No, I wouldn't trade away Bradley if the replacement is Gonzalez (with a view that Gonzo would be an upgrade).
I wasn't really looking at it as a direct swap there as much as I was trying to build off the hypothetically scenario where a Bradley-for-Schwarber trade was there, and how we could then field an (arguably of course) upgraded lineup through FA that meets the following criteria:

1. Doesn't project over $227m, leaving us at least $10m of in-season flexibility before hitting that second tier LT.
2. Doesn't add any contracts that extend beyond 2019
3. Leaves Hanley slotted in as the full time 1B, essentially eliminating the exact replay of 2018 possibility outcome.

Rough math going off https://twitter.com/redsoxpayroll has us starting with $25m to spend there after the hypothetical trade, and that also has cover filling out the roster and any other tweaks we want to make. Which obviously still leaves us some fairly decent room to potentially work with on bat #2, yet I'm trying to then figure out how just much less I should be liking CarGo on 1 year deal then anything else out there that also has a good chance to fit criteria #2.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,302
deep inside Guido territory
You want to get crazy? Trade Andrew Benintendi to Cubs for Anthony Rizzo and sign JD Martinez. The Cubs could then flip Benintendi for a top-notch SP, move Schwarber to 1B, and that solves their OF glut.

Lineup
Bogaerts SS
Betts RF
Martinez LF
Rizzo 1B
Devers 3B
Ramirez DH
Pedroia 2B
Vazquez C
Bradley CF
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,348
You want to get crazy? Trade Andrew Benintendi to Cubs for Anthony Rizzo and sign JD Martinez. The Cubs could then flip Benintendi for a top-notch SP, move Schwarber to 1B, and that solves their OF glut.

Lineup
Bogaerts SS
Betts RF
Martinez LF
Rizzo 1B
Devers 3B
Ramirez DH
Pedroia 2B
Vazquez C
Bradley CF
Better yet... build a time machine and sub in Lars Anderson for Rizzo in the Adrian Gonzalez deal.
 

BornToRun

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2011
17,340
You want to get crazy? Trade Andrew Benintendi to Cubs for Anthony Rizzo and sign JD Martinez. The Cubs could then flip Benintendi for a top-notch SP, move Schwarber to 1B, and that solves their OF glut.

Lineup
Bogaerts SS
Betts RF
Martinez LF
Rizzo 1B
Devers 3B
Ramirez DH
Pedroia 2B
Vazquez C
Bradley CF
I just came across that article about Chicago's rumored interest in Beni. Your proposal is the only thing that wouldn't have me saying "hell no" in an instant but I still don't know about pulling the trigger on that one. Might be easier to sign JD, shift Beni to center, and figure out something with JBJ wether that be the bench or a trade. There's also the fact that Chicago might not even go for A Beni-Rizzo trade.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
So in a potential scenario that sees JD Martinez's market get walk away stupid, but where you still end up looking to shop Bradley this winter, can a 1 year rebound flyer on CarGo (where you are still aiming to keep the get-back-under-the-LT next year hope alive) end up making any gamble sense as part of 2 player combo offensive upgrade?

Or is his age, the first half of 2017, and that horrid road split just too scary overall?
I would pass unless he accepted a part time role or something similar to what Moreland got last year.
I watch a lot of Rockies games and he looked like absolute toast until September. He has ungodly stretches like we've seen from JBJ and then looks completely lost for two months at a time. He's also been declining since 2013.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
I just came across that article about Chicago's rumored interest in Beni. Your proposal is the only thing that wouldn't have me saying "hell no" in an instant but I still don't know about pulling the trigger on that one. Might be easier to sign JD, shift Beni to center, and figure out something with JBJ wether that be the bench or a trade. There's also the fact that Chicago might not even go for A Beni-Rizzo trade.
Rizzo's contract is insanely good. 7mill next year, then 11, and two option years for 14.5 each.
They would be nuts if they moved him for a bat. I love Beni, but I doubt he gets to Rizzo's offensive level.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
I just came across that article about Chicago's rumored interest in Beni. Your proposal is the only thing that wouldn't have me saying "hell no" in an instant but I still don't know about pulling the trigger on that one. Might be easier to sign JD, shift Beni to center, and figure out something with JBJ wether that be the bench or a trade. There's also the fact that Chicago might not even go for A Beni-Rizzo trade.
If the Cubs need pitching and plan on flipping Beni, why don’t we just trade them pitching instead of Beni?
 

Tokyo Sox

Baka Gaijin
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 16, 2006
6,134
There
Trade Pomeranz (due for a raise in his last year of arbitration) for a bat and sign Yu Darvish, with the ancillary benefit of hopefully then having the inside track on Shohei Otani?
Do we know that Darvish and Otani get along? IIRC, Nomo while pitching for the Sox drilled Suzuki in the back at his first opportunity in MLB, presumably over some dispute back in Japan.
Sorry I'm a bit late on this but yes, as Yo La Tengo said, they are friends and occasional training partners.

Don't all the aces wear 18?
Oh, that's a good point and I believe correct. I had read it was a tribute to Darvish, but who knows and I didn't see any good pieces about their relationship on a quick google just now.
Most Japanese aces do, yes. But Darvish wore #11 for the Fighters, and then Ohtani took the same # as a tribute to Darvish.

I love the idea, and I think signing Darvish would indeed give an inside track on Ohtani. But unfortunately I think the Dodgers are the current front runners for both of those signings.