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

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,837
I continue to see Stanton as a moot point because I think he'll be aiming for the west coast with his NTC. Plus, I can't think of a package I'd be comfortable parting with for a player who is known to have such a steep aging curve.
How do you know what his aging curve will be?
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,660
Right, which all still plays into the surrounding *if* they can put a contender together factor that's more or less getting getting put on the back burner in most of this early speculation.

I'm personally guessing that Stanton's own pre-vision of how that all goes down, and what SF is realistically prepared to do/spend as a whole, doesn't end up being the winning match there. At which point SF turns their full attention to JDM, who will be more then happy to take the $$$ without any surrounding conditions other then he gets an early opt out.

I also think that the Yankees, if they could indeed maneuver a Stanton addition under this year's LT cap, would ultimately jump in with the winning offer before they ever let the above fall out lead to us getting him. So I'm not predicting the happily ever after for the Sox here happening either way.
The Yankees struck gold with Aaron Judge, blessed with one of the marketable surnames in baseball history. I could be wrong, but I think from both their standpoint and Stanton's, that it'd be a bad allocation of resources to trade for an older, more expensive similar player at the same position.

I could see the Yankees swooping in for JDM to replace Holliday at DH, though. I kind of believe them that they want to reset the tax this year to go big next offseason, but you never know.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,660
Santana seems to a lot of folks like a safe bet, but I'd argue that he's pretty risky. I can’t recall a more extreme pull hitter from the left side to have success in Fenway. He's a switch-hitter, but he runs a full 10 percent higher pull rate from the left side than even David Ortiz did, and doesn’t hit the ball nearly as hard.

His plate discipline's excellent, but I can’t help but think he’d bump into a lot of 300-foot flies to right and hit .220/.320/.410. Fenway suppresses LHH home runs by a factor of 26%, so his slugging might even be worse. IFFB high too.

Since he broke into the league in 2011, Santana’s got four of the most extreme pull-hitting seasons from the left side of anyone in baseball. Has there been a successful Sox hitter from the left side that pulled the ball this much?

 
Last edited:

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
The Yankees struck gold with Aaron Judge, blessed with one of the marketable surnames in baseball history. I could be wrong, but I think from both their standpoint and Stanton's, that it'd be a bad allocation of resources to trade for an older, more expensive similar player at the same position.

I could see the Yankees swooping in for JDM to replace Holliday at DH, though. I kind of believe them that they want to reset the tax this year to go big next offseason, but you never know.
Well, there is really 2 ways to look at the Yankees here. One is similar to how many here were viewing our own team going in to last winter, with all the dynasty in the making hopes and a prioritized thought process that leaned more towards future young talent upgrades that would best supplement a roster which would no doubt play itself out in a best case scenario manner. The other realizes beforehand that regression can be a bitch (hello Aaron Judge), it's never an embarrassment of riches without including a steady diet of high upside cost controlled pitching, and looking too far ahead with visions of grander can sometimes leave you somewhat oblivious to the fairly decent chance at hand that this all most likely plays out to be year 2 in an already open/ticking window of opportunity.

If it came down to hurting the Sox and greatly helping this year's chances for themselves (again, assuming they can fit him under the LT in their offseason plan), I just see Cashman leaning more towards the latter there atm and not passing based on some hypothetical/no guarantee idea in his head that he'd still be signing Harper or Machado latter.

It wouldn't shock me to see them swoop in on JDM either for that matter after watching their lineup get shut down in half those playoff games. Thinking about them having that type of financial flexibility to lurk in the back round with kinda sucks atm/imo.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,713
Well, there is really 2 ways to look at the Yankees here....The other realizes beforehand that regression can be a bitch (hello Aaron Judge), it's never an embarrassment of riches without including a steady diet of high upside cost controlled pitching, and looking too far ahead with visions of grander can sometimes leave you somewhat oblivious to the fairly decent chance at hand that this all most likely plays out to be year 2 in an already open/ticking window of opportunity.
Addressing those three points one at a time:

Regression: Always a possibility but NY still has four more stud position players coming by 2019: Torres, Frazier, Andujar, and Florial, all on top 100 prospect lists (Frazier has graduated) and Torres/Frazier/Florial very high on those (offseason reports have Florial moving into the top 25 on the next round of lists).

A steady diet of high upside cost controlled pitching: NY has this with Severino, Montgomery and Green all breaking through last year, four more top 100 or close guys knocking at the door (Sheffield, Abreu, Adams, Acevedo) and quite a bit more at lower levels (Guzman and Perez the standouts).

Looking too far ahead: Sanchez is cost-controlled through 2021, Judge and Severino 2022, and all the guys I already mentioned are controlled at least as long. They will have holes to fill in here and there of course but they will also have an immense amount of salary room to resign who they want.

So all of that deeply sucks for Sox fans, but on topic, NY is not going after Stanton or JDM. Feel free to mock me later if they do, but they will not, they don't need to.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,620
No worries, with Betts, Benintendi, Vazquez and Devers we will be pretty good as well. I imagine a few of those prospects will bust and a few Red Sox prospects will break out.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,473
Garden City
Addressing those three points one at a time:

Regression: Always a possibility but NY still has four more stud position players coming by 2019: Torres, Frazier, Andujar, and Florial, all on top 100 prospect lists (Frazier has graduated) and Torres/Frazier/Florial very high on those (offseason reports have Florial moving into the top 25 on the next round of lists).

A steady diet of high upside cost controlled pitching: NY has this with Severino, Montgomery and Green all breaking through last year, four more top 100 or close guys knocking at the door (Sheffield, Abreu, Adams, Acevedo) and quite a bit more at lower levels (Guzman and Perez the standouts).

Looking too far ahead: Sanchez is cost-controlled through 2021, Judge and Severino 2022, and all the guys I already mentioned are controlled at least as long. They will have holes to fill in here and there of course but they will also have an immense amount of salary room to resign who they want.

So all of that deeply sucks for Sox fans, but on topic, NY is not going after Stanton or JDM. Feel free to mock me later if they do, but they will not, they don't need to.
The only place anyone is even talking about the Yankees and Stanton or JD are in this thread. It would be insanely stupid for them to do either. They are also 100% serious about getting under the luxury tax threshold. This is their last good chance to do it and they have no immediate needs.
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,371
Given the necessity for Alex Cora to set a new tone and narrative to the team, signing Hosmer for his "championship/leadership pedigree" might even be counterproductive. The fact that he hits like Casey Kotchman makes the decision even simpler.
I agree with the first sentence, but let's not let facts get in the way of your overall point.

In 53 less career games, Hosmer has +50 points of OPS(43 of which is slugging), 127 more runs, 141 hits, and 31 more homers than Casey Kotchman.

In Kotchman's age 27 season he slashed .217 .280 .336. Last year, Hosmer's age 27, he slashed
.318 .384 .498.

Casey Kotchman wishes he hit like Eric Hosmer. Hosmer may not be worth the contract he garners, and there may be other arguments against signing him, but him hitting like Casey Kotchman ain't one of them.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
Addressing those three points one at a time:

Regression: Always a possibility but NY still has four more stud position players coming by 2019: Torres, Frazier, Andujar, and Florial, all on top 100 prospect lists (Frazier has graduated) and Torres/Frazier/Florial very high on those (offseason reports have Florial moving into the top 25 on the next round of lists).

A steady diet of high upside cost controlled pitching: NY has this with Severino, Montgomery and Green all breaking through last year, four more top 100 or close guys knocking at the door (Sheffield, Abreu, Adams, Acevedo) and quite a bit more at lower levels (Guzman and Perez the standouts).

Looking too far ahead: Sanchez is cost-controlled through 2021, Judge and Severino 2022, and all the guys I already mentioned are controlled at least as long. They will have holes to fill in here and there of course but they will also have an immense amount of salary room to resign who they want.

So all of that deeply sucks for Sox fans, but on topic, NY is not going after Stanton or JDM. Feel free to mock me later if they do, but they will not, they don't need to.
Like I stated there is 2 ways to view all that, and your way there is leaning more the first one I listed and which you cut out of the quote. Where you are essentially left assuming that:

- Cashman ultimately ends up being ok at this point with the possibility that said regression might lead to looking more towards 2019 or beyond.
- That up and coming pitching you have ends up panning out enough that it keeps you from having to go down the same sacrificing further overall assets route we did with Sale.
- The overall window of opportunity a couple years from now and after the Sox win this year's division post-Stanton acquisition still ends up looking better for you then it already could right now.

The only place anyone is even talking about the Yankees and Stanton or JD are in this thread. It would be insanely stupid for them to do either. They are also 100% serious about getting under the luxury tax threshold. This is their last good chance to do it and they have no immediate needs.
As opposed to the people sitting around elsewhere and talking about the *potential chance* at signing Harper or Machado a year from now, possibly for significantly more on the per/year scale then it would take to just go ahead and firmly secure that big splash bat in Stanton now? I've seen those debates, and if you guys aren't willing to see that other side logic there I doubt you'll see and agree with me basically saying the same thing here. In an overall thought process where you are even considering making a serious run on Harper next winter, you have to at least take a serious look at the Stanton alternative in front of them right now. Again, especially if they could manage it while still resetting the LT.

The Yankees also have an immediate need as well....beating the Red Sox for the division next season in year 2 of an already open window of opportunity. Which is going to be looking notably harder to do if the Sox manage to fill that crater sized hole in the middle of it's current lineup with bat like Stanton.
 
Last edited:

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,713
I have a lot more to say but I will drop it as this isn't really the thread for it. I hope Boston doesn't get Stanton or JDM, but not nearly enough to hope that NY is the one to block them from doing so.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
I have a lot more to say but I will drop it as this isn't really the thread for it. I hope Boston doesn't get Stanton or JDM, but not nearly enough to hope that NY is the one to block them from doing so.
Well keep in mind I'm also arguing the possibility fit there more so then the probability that it actually comes down to that Boston or NY on Stanton or JDM scenario.

Two weeks from now it's more likely that we'll be knee deep in Hosmer to the Sox rumors/speculation anyway, which should probably have much less potential impact on what the NYY may or may not decide to do themselves this winter.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,660
I agree with the first sentence, but let's not let facts get in the way of your overall point.

In 53 less career games, Hosmer has +50 points of OPS(43 of which is slugging), 127 more runs, 141 hits, and 31 more homers than Casey Kotchman.

Casey Kotchman wishes he hit like Eric Hosmer. Hosmer may not be worth the contract he garners, and there may be other arguments against signing him, but him hitting like Casey Kotchman ain't one of them.
The fact that their counting stats are anywhere near that comparable probably proves my point more than yours.

Kotchman hit groundballs at a rate of 54% for his career — 27th in MLB during the span that he played ('04-'12) — which is an insanely bad number for a slow, ostensibly power-hitting first baseman.

Hosmer hits groundballs at a rate of 53.4% for his career — 31st in MLB during that span ('11-'17). I was being hyperbolic and of course Hosmer's better (though not defensively), but he literally hits like Casey Kotchman.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
https://www.fangraphs.com/library/the-beginners-guide-to-aging-curves/

If you want to tell me that you believe Stanton will be an outlier from the standard and proven aging curve for MLB players, that's totally cool. But his range of outcomes falls into an all too dangerous and precipitous aging territory.
Let's assume that the team that trades for him will have to pick up his option leaving $310M owed over 11 years. Then let's do a standard aging of fWAR, since you are just pointing to the typical aging curve.If we start with 6.9 fWAR (this year's total) and assume his decline will begin in earnest after next season, he'd be worth 48.4 fWAR over the life of the contract (the general belief is that WAR totals drop about 0.5 per year). If the cost of WAR remains the estimated $8.5M it is now, that's $411.4M.

While that's best case scenario, he has a long way to fall before he's not worth what he'll be paid overall. And that's not accounting for the rise in the cost of WAR from year to year, which would bring the worth of his production up even higher.

Now, I'm not arguing that he's a lock to be worth his contract or that trading for him and all of that money is an easy win. But that quick analysis is precisely as well thought out and useful as your assumption that because players decline as they age, acquiring Stanton at this stage wouldn't be worth any prospect package that you can envision.

Yeah, every player ages and declines. Yeah, Stanton will too. Yes, he's approaching the point where his decline will begin. None of that is a terribly compelling argument against trading for him and his contract, however.
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,371
The fact that their counting stats are anywhere near that comparable probably proves my point more than yours.

Kotchman hit groundballs at a rate of 54% for his career — 27th in MLB during the span that he played ('04-'12) — which is an insanely bad number for a slow, ostensibly power-hitting first baseman.

Hosmer hits groundballs at a rate of 53.4% for his career — 31st in MLB during that span ('11-'17). I was being hyperbolic and of course Hosmer's better (though not defensively), but he literally hits like Casey Kotchman.
Comparable? 127 Runs is a MVP season and he has more in 1/3 season of games. 141 hits is a seasons worth of hits for a .250 hitter in 1/3 season of games. In a record setting season in 2017, over 30 players hit 30 homeruns. With over 750 players in MLB only 30 hit 30 homers in a record setting year. Hosmer has 31 more in, you guessed it, 1/3 seasons more games.

So he has the same groundball rate? Ok. The above can be translated into rates as well if you want to do the math. "Counting stats" is often thrown around as a "you are not familiar with advanced stats" codeword. Sometimes, they also just tell a story of a better hitter.

Career
Kotchman wRC+ 93
Hosmer wRC+ 111

Kotchman LD 17.4%
Hosmer LD 20%

Kotchman Hard Contact % 25.1
Hosmer Hard Contact % 32.6

By any measure, Hosmer is a better hitter.
 

effectivelywild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
466
The fact that their counting stats are anywhere near that comparable probably proves my point more than yours.

Kotchman hit groundballs at a rate of 54% for his career — 27th in MLB during the span that he played ('04-'12) — which is an insanely bad number for a slow, ostensibly power-hitting first baseman.

Hosmer hits groundballs at a rate of 53.4% for his career — 31st in MLB during that span ('11-'17). I was being hyperbolic and of course Hosmer's better (though not defensively), but he literally hits like Casey Kotchman.

I think it's really misusing stats to cite Kotchman and Hosmer as really all that comparable, aside from groundball tendencies. You're putting a lot of weight into one rate stat and essentially ignoring all other components. Its akin to me saying that Tanaka and Kershaw are almost equivalent because their k/9 last year was within about 0.5

Now, I do agree with what I think is your overall point, which is that Hosmer hits too many groundballs to be worth what his potential contract will be---it just limits his power potential. But there's no need to abuse rate stats like that.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
https://www.fangraphs.com/library/the-beginners-guide-to-aging-curves/

If you want to tell me that you believe Stanton will be an outlier from the standard and proven aging curve for MLB players, that's totally cool. But his range of outcomes falls into an all too dangerous and precipitous aging territory.
But you didn't say anything about a "standard and proven aging curve". You said Stanton was "known" to have a "steep" aging curve--which clearly implies that Stanton himself is an outlier, with a steeper-than-normal curve. If all you meant was that hitters tend to age steeply, and you don't want any part of that, that's a good argument for steering clear of any long contract with a peak-or-older hitter, but not much of an argument against Stanton in particular.
 

PapaSox

New Member
Dec 26, 2015
230
MA
I was thinking rather than re-signing Fister, Reed and Nunez the Sox should work out a trade with Reds for Iglesias, Stephenson and Peraza. Iglesias could do setup, Stephenson MR/Spot Start and Peraza covering 2B/SS. Then adding either Bruce as a DH/4th OF or Santana 1B & Austin Jackson 4th OF would be possible with money to spare for Trade Deadline.

I copied this to the Moderate Thread which is where it should be placed. If someone could delete this from this thread it would be most appreciated.
 
Last edited:

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,673
Maine
No, this is the right thread for that idea. Not a chance the Red Sox have what it would take to get those players from the Reds. The Reds are still rebuilding, they aren't going to move cheap and useful players like those without getting a ransom for them.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
https://www.fangraphs.com/library/the-beginners-guide-to-aging-curves/

If you want to tell me that you believe Stanton will be an outlier from the standard and proven aging curve for MLB players, that's totally cool. But his range of outcomes falls into an all too dangerous and precipitous aging territory.
Is there any evidence that superstars have a different aging curve than mediocrities? Should we assume that Stanton will have an average aging curve, or should we acknowledge that he's already an outlier and thus more likely to remain one at any age.
 

Oppo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2009
1,576
Sign JD, trade for Abreu, resign Rajai, trade JBJ for Baez, sign Avila

1b: Abreu
2b: Pedroia
SS: Xander
3b: Devers
LF: JD
CF: Benintendi
RF: Betts
DH: Hanley
C: Vazquez

Bench:
Baez- covers 2nd with Pedroia out, then moves into super utility
Rajai- plays CF on days you want to rest the other OF/ days you want the other OF to DH instead of Hanley
Avila- left handed bat to spell C and 1b
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
The White Sox are apparently open to trading Abreu away this winter, which is a it surprising to me. Maybe his extension asking price is too high for them?

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/11/looking-for-a-match-in-a-jose-abreu-trade.html

In a lot of ways, I'd prefer this to either JD Martinez or Stanton, though, not on top of one of them (to respond to Oppo). He might get paid between 40 and 45 million the next two years in arbitration, but if the goal is to maximize this window then rebuild, Abreu being under control for only two more years might make him a better fit. The cost in prospects might be less than what Stanton will command, and the total dollars paid out is going to be far less than either Stanton or Martinez.

Abreu is a lock for a .350 OBP and is probably a good bet for a .500 SLG with 25-30 HR. The downside is he's a poor defender, but since they can either look to extend him as Hanley's replacement at DH or let him walk for a comp pick after 2019, that's something I'd be willing to live with for the next two seasons, I think.

If the price is significantly lower than Stanton, doing this and signing Jay Bruce to play LF, then dealing JBJ for another starter could make for a really formidable team on both sides of the ball, so to speak.

Benintendi, Bogaerts, Betts, Abreu, Bruce, Devers, Hanley, Pedroia, Vazquez

Sale, Price, Pomeranz, Porcello and whatever you can swap JBJ and Eduardo Rodriguez for.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
The White Sox are apparently open to trading Abreu away this winter, which is a it surprising to me. Maybe his extension asking price is too high for them?

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/11/looking-for-a-match-in-a-jose-abreu-trade.html

In a lot of ways, I'd prefer this to either JD Martinez or Stanton, though, not on top of one of them (to respond to Oppo). He might get paid between 40 and 45 million the next two years in arbitration, but if the goal is to maximize this window then rebuild, Abreu being under control for only two more years might make him a better fit. The cost in prospects might be less than what Stanton will command, and the total dollars paid out is going to be far less than either Stanton or Martinez.

Abreu is a lock for a .350 OBP and is probably a good bet for a .500 SLG with 25-30 HR. The downside is he's a poor defender, but since they can either look to extend him as Hanley's replacement at DH or let him walk for a comp pick after 2019, that's something I'd be willing to live with for the next two seasons, I think.

If the price is significantly lower than Stanton, doing this and signing Jay Bruce to play LF, then dealing JBJ for another starter could make for a really formidable team on both sides of the ball, so to speak.

Benintendi, Bogaerts, Betts, Abreu, Bruce, Devers, Hanley, Pedroia, Vazquez

Sale, Price, Pomeranz, Porcello and whatever you can swap JBJ and Eduardo Rodriguez for.
It also keeps payroll flexibility for next year's potentially massive FA class. I wouldn't mind Abreu for all of your reasons as well.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
The market is fairly saturated atm with decent to good 1B options, and some of those guys are going to end up going really cheap. With only 2 years of control left and a much higher salary consideration then you'd usually be trading off for in that situation, I'm hard pressed to pin down how much current/notable trade value Abreu even has.

Guessing that Chicago's asking price ends up being too high (for everybody), and if anything they end up looking more towards trying to cash in on a mid season deal there.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,660
It also keeps payroll flexibility for next year's potentially massive FA class. I wouldn't mind Abreu for all of your reasons as well.
Besides maybe Price or Kimbrel, who do you realistically think we’re signing in next year’s massive FA class? Machado won’t come here; I have a really hard time seeing Harper or Kershaw in Boston. No one else makes sense.

With NYY (publicly saying they’re) getting under the tax, our pricey acquisition(s) happen this offseason.

Abreu’s fine. But given the state of the farm, I’d far prefer trading a lesser package for the bigger-salaried Belt, who’s a better player than Abreu anyway.
 
Last edited:

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
Besides maybe Price or Kimbrel, who do you realistically think we’re signing in next year’s massive FA class? Machado won’t come here; I have a really hard time seeing Harper or Kershaw in Boston. No one else makes sense.
Assuming you meant Pom instead of Price (since outside the hypothetical it's pretty doubtful a 33yo that is only one year removed from a iffy season is going to opt out of 4/$127m, regardless what kind of 2018 he has), I think he's by far more likely then any of the listed alternatives.

For me Pom was the first possibility that came to mind when DD made that recent "we have our own guys we want to keep" comment.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,660
I meant Price, but agree he’ll keep 4/$127M.

I’d rather trade Pom next month than sign him to a multi-year contract after 2018. He dropped his cutter almost entirely in 2017, and 92% of his pitches were fastballs or curves — more extreme than Jose Quintana, Lance McCullers, even Rich Hill. Pom’s curve is great, but I’m not sure how starters can survive on two pitches.

Maybe this was per request of the Sox pitching staff, but considering DD’s stated appreciation of his cutter as a reason he pursued him in 2016, I doubt it. He also lost 5 mph in September.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
Regarding Abreu - he isn't going to be cheap even if they were to trade for him. He made 10.8 mill last year in his first year of arbitration and had a good year. I would think it would be at least another 3-5 million this year and maybe closer to 20 in year 3.

He's an ok option, but I'd rather just spend money instead of prospects and money. Unless his going rate isn't too bad,
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,711
One note on the 1b candidates:

2017 WRC+ in high leverage situations, and with men in scoring position:
Abreu: 56, 166
Santana: 43, 92
Moreland: 45, 95
Ramirez: 45, 57
Morrison: 57, 60
Hosmer: 122, 147
Martinez: 160, 169

A) That makes me like Hosmer a lot more than I did a few minutes ago. His career numbers (134, 115) back this up pretty well too.
B) How on earth did Abreu manage a 110 point spread between these two numbers?
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
1 year sample size and random noise?
Yup. 218 career at bats in high leverage (42 last year) and 564 with men in scoring position.
High leverage is often against a really good pitcher too since the inning and score are weighed into it.

To Hosmer's credit, career wise he has done better the more the game is on the line. Low, medium and high leverage he is at 100, 120, and 134.

Probably not worth banking on going forward though.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Ken Rosenthal lists 3 teams that are "engaged" in talks with the Marlins on Stanton: Cardinals, Giants, Red Sox. Also, 3 other clubs are "on the periphery".

https://theathletic.com/168401/2017/11/28/rosenthal-dont-be-surprised-if-the-giancarlo-stanton-trade-talks-drag-on-heres-why/
I just can't see how this could happen. I mean since the team has a pretty barren farm system, you're probably looking at giving up E-Rod, Chavis, Groome, Travis, Mata and like 1 or 2 more prospects plus taking on the entire contract. St Louis and SF have much better prospects but Boston would probably be the only team willing to take on that entire deal.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
I just can't see how this could happen. I mean since the team has a pretty barren farm system, you're probably looking at giving up E-Rod, Chavis, Groome, Travis, Mata and like 1 or 2 more prospects plus taking on the entire contract. St Louis and SF have much better prospects but Boston would probably be the only team willing to take on that entire deal.
If they take on the entire deal, the prospect haul for Miami would not be as high.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
I just can't see how this could happen. I mean since the team has a pretty barren farm system, you're probably looking at giving up E-Rod, Chavis, Groome, Travis, Mata and like 1 or 2 more prospects plus taking on the entire contract. St Louis and SF have much better prospects but Boston would probably be the only team willing to take on that entire deal.
That's not set in reality. Have you seen the rumored names thrown around upthread? Only one of them is pseudo elite. As in top 50. Rodriguez is not going in that deal or they wouldn't do it. Maybe Groome and two lesser pieces, but you aren't being realistic about what would be needed for a team to get this done. If the Giants are actually in the running with one of the worst systems in baseball, then it ain't gonna be close to the above.

This is arguably the riskiest contract in history. This isn't trying to acquire a Cy Young in his prime on a ridiculously team friendly deal.
 
Last edited:

mfried

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 23, 2005
1,680
That's not set in reality. Have you seen the rumored names thrown around upthread? Only one of them is pseudo elite. As in top 50. Rodriguez is not going in that deal or they wouldn't do it. Maybe Groome and two lesser pieces, but you aren't being realistic about what would be needed for a team to get this done. If the Giants are actually in the running with one of the worst systems in baseball, then it ain't gonna be close to the above.

This is arguably the riskiest contract in history. This isn't trying to acquire a Cy Young in his prime on a ridiculously team friendly deal.
How about Stanton and Gordon for Porcello and Bradley?
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
How about Stanton and Gordon for Porcello and Bradley?
Where does Gordon play, and why would the Marlins take on Porcello if they are rebuilding? DD has mentioned that he doesn't really want to move guys off the 25 man roster either.
 
Last edited:

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
That's not set in reality. Have you seen the rumored names thrown around upthread? Only one of them is pseudo elite. As in top 50. Rodriguez is not going in that deal or they wouldn't do it. Maybe Groome and two lesser pieces, but you aren't being realistic about what would be needed for a team to get this done. If the Giants are actually in the running with one of the worst systems in baseball, then it ain't gonna be close to the above.

This is arguably the riskiest contract in history. This isn't trying to acquire a Cy Young in his prime on a ridiculously team friendly deal.
Well who exactly is even close to pseudo elite out of the Sox system? Groome lost a ton of value. Chavis probably projects as a borderline everyday guy. The rest? Very uninspiring. I wouldn't be shocked to see only Chavis in the BA 100. They aren't going to give away Stanton. If the Sox are serious they're going to need to give E-Rod or someone on his level on top of mid level prospects. Ramos is a better prospect than anyone the Sox have.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
This is arguably the riskiest contract in history. This isn't trying to acquire a Cy Young in his prime on a ridiculously team friendly deal.
A somewhat funny surrounding aspect to all of this is that even after the MVP season concluded, Stanton's contract basically went from being widely speculated as "nobody is realistically going to want to take that monster on in full" to hot commodity overnight after Jeter basically confirmed that they were looking to deal him. Which was obviously going to happen in the name of pushing the juicy story of course, but still. Getting somewhat lost underneath the mountain of hype is still the underlining story of that extreme backend length of the contract, which usually only ever becomes "market" in scenarios like this due to *one* GM being out there who then decides make a massive reach.

That said I still like the Dodgers there after they get done slow playing their hand. Easy no trade waive consideration, definitely could use the lineup upgrade, and with a ton of money coming off their books after 2018 the one year absorption cost shouldn't be that prohibitive for them. Plus if they want to sell on Puig now would probably be the best time (which could even be worked into a 3 way deal I guess).
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Great bit of work by Darren Williams on home runs gained and lost in other parks for Stanton. I'm mobile so I can only post the tweet.

 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
Well who exactly is even close to pseudo elite out of the Sox system? Groome lost a ton of value. Chavis probably projects as a borderline everyday guy. The rest? Very uninspiring. I wouldn't be shocked to see only Chavis in the BA 100. They aren't going to give away Stanton. If the Sox are serious they're going to need to give E-Rod or someone on his level on top of mid level prospects. Ramos is a better prospect than anyone the Sox have.
Chavis and Groome probably gets it done, but I doubt the Sox would consider that. The biggest piece you mentioned though is Rodriguez and Ramos is nowhere near his value. If you are adding two top 100 guys (yes Groome and Chavis will be on the list regardless of past seasons) and then Mata who is creeping closer, and then 1 to 2 other guys, it just isn't realistic.
 
Last edited:

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
The biggest piece you mentioned is Rodriguez and Ramos is nowhere near his value. If you are adding two top 100 guys (yes Groome and Chavis will be on the list regardless of past seasons) and then Mata who is creeping closer, and then 1 to 2 other guys, it just isn't realistic.
We disagree on the value of the Sox minor leaguers. Ramos is better than anyone in the Sox system and yes if he reaches his potential then he has more value than E-Rod. We'll find out the price soon enough but if all it would cost is Groome and 2 smaller pieces then the deal would be done. Besides if they shopped it around the Giants would laugh and say we'll give you Ramos and Shaw and have Stanton on the next plane out here. Cards could offer Reyes or a package headlined by Kelly or Flaherty +. All of which would easily beat anything the Sox could do without trading a young guy like E-Rod in the deal. The Marlins are still going to get some talent for Stanton. Groome + lower guys is delusional. Who would the plus guy be? Diaz? A package of Groome Diaz Mata Chavis still doesn't beat anything STL puts together. Shaw is probably a better prospect right now than anyone the Sox have. Even though he's 24.

If this was last year then Groome is probably on the same level as Flaherty.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
We disagree on the value of the Sox minor leaguers. Ramos is better than anyone in the Sox system and yes if he reaches his potential then he has more value than E-Rod. We'll find out the price soon enough but if all it would cost is Groome and 2 smaller pieces then the deal would be done. Besides if they shopped it around the Giants would laugh and say we'll give you Ramos and Shaw and have Stanton on the next plane out here. Cards could offer Reyes or a package headlined by Kelly or Flaherty +. All of which would easily beat anything the Sox could do without trading a young guy like E-Rod in the deal. The Marlins are still going to get some talent for Stanton. Groome + lower guys is delusional. Who would the plus guy be? Diaz? A package of Groome Diaz Mata Chavis still doesn't beat anything STL puts together. Shaw is probably a better prospect right now than anyone the Sox have. Even though he's 24.

If this was last year then Groome is probably on the same level as Flaherty.

We definitely disagree.

Ramos has had 150 at bats in rookie ball. He is not a better prospect than either Chavis or Groome at this point. A ball18 year old outfielders are not hot commodities, nor do the Marlins need one right now. They need young pitching.

Chavis and Groome isn't even a drool worthy package in general,and it isn't worth it to the Red Sox.

The point is that a big package of good prospects isn't going to happen for Stanton unless a massive amount of money is subsidized.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
The Marlins need to jettison large sums of money AND get prospects back. Simply dumping salary (of good players) doesn't move the needle. I don't think any team wants to take on Stanton's entire deal, but someone might, provided the return is minimal. I just don't think MIA will make that kind of deal. So the question is, how much will MIA need and be willing to swallow to get a top prospect or two back? They'd be "buying" the prospects in paying some of Stanton's deal, so I'd guess they'd want higher level guys with more certainty.

Chavis would count, but he's a secondary piece. Groome wouldn't be a good enough headliner, given his struggles this past season. E-Rod and JBJ aren't controllable long enough, but they do have value.

Upshot, I think the Sox would need to move JBJ to a third team for prospects that MIA likes. Between the Sox and Marlins, that's the only type of deal that makes sense for both teams, imo. But I also don't see the Sox as the best fit. Dodgers and Giants make more sense to me.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,473
Garden City
We definitely disagree.

Ramos has had 150 at bats in rookie ball. He is not a better prospect than either Chavis or Groome at this point. A ball18 year old outfielders are not hot commodities, nor do the Marlins need one right now. They need young pitching.

Chavis and Groome isn't even a drool worthy package in general,and it isn't worth it to the Red Sox.

The point is that a big package of good prospects isn't going to happen for Stanton unless a massive amount of money is subsidized.
The Arod trade to NY is a decent comparison here in terms of contract, performance, and age. I don't see why anyone believes Miami won't be able to get a good package of prospects in a market that looks to be at least a little competitive. The market will dictate what Miami can get for him and unless there's only one suitor, he'll command a package with some top 50 prospects.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
The Arod trade to NY is a decent comparison here in terms of contract, performance, and age. I don't see why anyone believes Miami won't be able to get a good package of prospects in a market that looks to be at least a little competitive. The market will dictate what Miami can get for him and unless there's only one suitor, he'll command a package with some top 50 prospects.
Yes, that's a decent comp, although A-Rod was a better all-around player at a more premium position (even getting moved off SS) with a much better health history. Even then, while Texas got Soriano in return, they had to eat $67M out of the $179M owed to A-Rod. But I agree: If Miami is willing to discount Stanton that much, they'll get legit prospects in return.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
The Arod trade to NY is a decent comparison here in terms of contract, performance, and age. I don't see why anyone believes Miami won't be able to get a good package of prospects in a market that looks to be at least a little competitive. The market will dictate what Miami can get for him and unless there's only one suitor, he'll command a package with some top 50 prospects.
I don't think they compare that well but that's maybe the closest one out there. A-Rod was basically Mike Trout level good (37 WAR over the previous 4 seasons) and played shortstop.

Stanton isn't in that stratosphere and the contract is much longer and with an opt out. There are many options to get great production in the outfield for a fraction of the price and spend the money elsewhere. That wasn't the case at shortstop.

I wouldn't be shocked if the Marlins got two top 50 prospects, but there is the implication we'd need to move both big league and farm talent and I don't think that's the case.

I also don't think the market is very big which limits what the Marlins can get.
 
Last edited: