Bloom needs to set a deadline. They’re going to search for prospects now?
Bloom needs to set a deadline. They’re going to search for prospects now?
No. If you believe the Trade Simulator*, even with half his salary subsidized, Price's trade value is still underwater by $7M. So if the Sox subsidize his full -$55M deficit, they're only saving $14M/year on his 3-year contract, which doesn't get them under the LTT. And even then, Price's trade value is 0. Why is a team going to trade assets and pay $14M per year for a 34 year old pitcher who has thrown 74, 176 and 107 innings the past three years when they can sign a guy like that for just money? Nobody was going to give the Sox anything of value for Price -- not at any salary relief price point that would make a difference to the LTT reset. The only way to get rid of Price was to attach him to Mookie.Why should Price, with the Sox picking up half his salary, still cost an asset to unload? Price seems attractive at his subsidized cost, no?
So now we're arguably giving up the three best players in 2020 in this deal?No way that Minnesota gives up more than Gatorade for Maeda. I wonder if they could expand the deal to include Workman or Barnes and then have the Dodgers add Gonsolin.
BOS -> LAD: Mookie, Workman, Price, $$
LAD -> BOS: Verdugo, Gonsolin
LAD -> MIN: Maeda
MIN -> BOS: Gatorade
Odd they wouldn’t search in their own cupboard. Unless the prospect position profile doesn’t match up.Bloom needs to set a deadline. They’re going to search for prospects now?
At this point it has to be a pride thing.the Dodgers are loaded with prospects ... and they won't part with one to finish the trade?
this actually could fall apart
You would think right? Friedman would really let this fall apart over a prospect like May or Downs? I don’t care, I’m rooting for this to fall apart.Odd they wouldn’t search in their own cupboard. Unless the prospect position profile doesn’t match up.
No, Friedman won’t give up May, who would probably get it done.Odd they wouldn’t search in their own cupboard. Unless the prospect position profile doesn’t match up.
Sounds like normal Price to me.As fun as it would be to have Betts playing for the Sox in 2020, the thought of an even more sour David Price in the clubhouse is cringe-inducing. He'd have zero motivation to push himself if his arm or wrist felt anything less than perfect.
But it’s only after teams agree to a trade that their trainers make available their organization’s complete files on player medical histories. Those files include MRIs and other images, trainer notes, and virtually every detail about a player’s medical history since his entry into professional baseball — thus offering far more thorough information than is known before a trade agreement.
How do baseball teams exchange medical information after agreeing to a trade?So, what then?
The Sox likely reached a conclusion about Graterol’s medicals on Wednesday late afternoon or evening — determining that he had a chance to remain valuable as a reliever, but that the chance that he would be a starter had been diminished, perhaps even eliminated. In that case, they’d be trading for a less valuable package of players.
Once that determination was made, the other teams involved in the deal likely would have to make their own assessments as to the accuracy of the Red Sox’ evaluation. So, more orthopedists and more specialists looking at medical files that might have to be physically transferred. The three-team nature of the trade increases the complexity of those dynamics.
At that point, the front offices of the teams could get to work in determining if there was another compensation package — for instance, Verdugo and Graterol plus an additional prospect — that would supply the Sox with their expected return.
The Dodgers were supposed to be getting another prospect from the Angels in the Pederson deal - send him along.the Dodgers are loaded with prospects ... and they won't part with one to finish the trade?
this actually could fall apart
My father, my three brothers and I were playing poker at the kitchen table one night. My oldest brother hadn't won a hand all game, when he went head to head with the old man over a rather sizable pot in a game of five-card draw. My brother thought he had it won with three kings, started to scoop the pot ... before our father stopped him.I don't see how Friedman can let this fall apart, so in the end, he won't.
This makes no sense. So the Sox have to convince Minny that Kenta Maeda is worth more? If these are really the facts, Bloom is getting played.Bob Nightengale
@BNightengale
2m
The #Redsox and #Twins are trying to work out their differences on RHP Brusdar Graterol’s medical reports without involving the #Dodgers. The Dodgers remain quite confident the two teams will reach a resolution that finalizes the deal bringing Mookie Betts and David Price to LA
If we're going to give up one of the B boys, maybe we should take one back.Bloom needs to set a deadline. They’re going to search for prospects now?
Verdugo is actually way better value than a prospect. He's already proven he can play in the bigs.It’s still absolutely remarkable that Friedman is getting Mookie Betts and David Price (at 15mm AAV) and isn’t giving up one single prospect. Remarkable.
And I’m someone, excluding the new info, who was pretty high on Verdugo.
Sure, and why don't we ask for Bellinger too? Maybe they'll just throw in Will Smith! And then we'll all get ponies!If we're going to give up one of the B boys, maybe we should take one back.
Buehler?
The genius part of this deal by Friedman was getting a third team involved, and using Maeda to get Minnesota to give up a top prospect instead of them.It’s still absolutely remarkable that Friedman is getting Mookie Betts and David Price (at 15mm AAV) and isn’t giving up one single prospect. Remarkable.
And I’m someone, excluding the new info, who was pretty high on Verdugo.
You can see Minnesota’s point though, Maeda is relatively inexpensive, but really not very good. So even if Graterol isn’t a SP prospect, how much does LA expect for a 4/5 starter on the wrong side of 30? I mean Maeda can make starts and eat innings cromulently, but he gets a lot more expensive as a full time SP, so LA loses even on that ground.Granted we know nothing about who has actually said or thought what... I think the notion that new GM Bloom was planning to pull a fast one over his former boss Friedman is, frankly, silly. I think Friedman and the Twins had had prior discussions, likely the Twins eyeing guys like Stripling and Maeda as potentially available and cheap SP options for them, and LA brought MN into the trade discussions to meet what Chaim wanted: a high ceiling, cheap, close-to-MLB SP prospect (Graterol).
I think LA and MN realize that Boston has a legit concern about Graterol’s medicals. But how do you solve it? Is it solely MN’s problem? Too rigid a position by LA doesn’t help LA seal the deal. What if MN disagrees with Boston’s view and valuation of Graterol? Tough for them to add in more value. Chaim wants something more - a different player entirely? An extra player? Less money to subsidize Price? We don’t know. My guess? He wants a starting pitcher, and he wants projectability. Puts each team in a pickle, because the reason for bringing MN in might not really apply anymore.
Is it Bloom getting played or Minny? If I was the Twins GM I'd say "You don't want Brusdar? Ok, deal's off, that's fine." Put the pressure on the Dodgers to sweeten the pot rather than MN. Do they really want Maeda that badly?This makes no sense. So the Sox have to convince Minny that Kenta Maeda is worth more? If these are really the facts, Bloom is getting played.
So we take an expiring contract in trade for an expiring contract? Yeah... nah.SoxScout has a great idea on Twitter: LA should kill its deal with the LAA and the Sox should get Pederson and Stripling from LA as part of this deal. Maybe the Sox throw in a lottery ticket prospect to sweeten the pot slightly.
View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1225627265960226817?s=19
It’s a fine idea given the circumstances. Pederson would make four LHH outfielders, which is silly. But he’s simply currency, and he would likely get traded again at the deadline or sooner, or JBJ or Benny would, which means more prospects.So we take an expiring contract in trade for an expiring contract? Yeah... nah.
All things considered I'd rather roll with Verdugo than take the chance a trade comes together down the road. Either that or the whole thing falls apart. Amazing how much better that Gammons trade sounds than what we ended up withIt’s a fine idea given the circumstances. Pederson would make four LHH outfielders, which is silly. But he’s simply currency, and he would likely get traded again at the deadline or sooner, or JBJ or Benny would, which means more prospects.
You're still getting Verdugo. The theory is that it'd be the original 2 guys plus Pederson and Stripling for Mookie, Price and someone in A ball.All things considered I'd rather roll with Verdugo than take the chance a trade comes together down the road. Either that or the whole thing falls apart. Amazing how much better that Gammons trade sounds than what we ended up with
LA is loaded with more MI prospects than they can ever use. They’re going to end up dealing them for more A Ball prospects from other organizations. Downs is a SS that will never play an inning at the position for them because there are two better SS ahead of him and two more high upside ones behind him. And they still have high upside 2B prospects to boot. But LA wants to clear the cruft off their roster in acquiring Betts and nothing else.Odd they wouldn’t search in their own cupboard. Unless the prospect position profile doesn’t match up.
With Lux, Downs, Estevez (who they’ve already moved off SS because of Downs), Busch, et al they have so much MI depth that they can just trade Seager for even more prospects. Or move him to 3B, but that just further makes Estevez and Busch superfluous. Meaning that they’re going to get traded for more prospects.I wonder if LA might be counting on some of those cheap top prospects to help keep payroll down so they can make Mookie a significant offer next year. What is worth more to them, Mookie for one year with less financial flexibility to sign him long term, or to pass on too steep a price now and be better positioned financially when Mookie hits free agency? One year of Mookie or multiple?
I think LA's window to remain competitive is going to be open for a few years.
They just want a competent and relatively inexpensive arm for the end of their rotation. Even if existing structural damage limits Graterol to a bullpen role, that’s more than enough value for Maeda. So I agree, they should just tell Friedman to pound sand because someone will trade them an uninspiring but solid end of the rotation starter for a potential relief ace.Is it Bloom getting played or Minny? If I was the Twins GM I'd say "You don't want Brusdar? Ok, deal's off, that's fine." Put the pressure on the Dodgers to sweeten the pot rather than MN. Do they really want Maeda that badly?
I’ve said it at least twice already but we don’t know the full Dodgers/Angels trade yet and it’s very likely the Angels are adding a top prospect like Brandon Marsh, since Stripling will be their #1 or #2 SP.SoxScout has a great idea on Twitter: LA should kill its deal with the LAA and the Sox should get Pederson and Stripling from LA as part of this deal. Maybe the Sox throw in a lottery ticket prospect to sweeten the pot slightly.
View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1225627265960226817?s=19
In that case I take back the snark and apologize sincerely. Certainly better than what we got, anywayYou're still getting Verdugo. The theory is that it'd be the original 2 guys plus Pederson and Stripling for Mookie, Price and someone in A ball.
Trade him to the Angels. Seriously, though, someone will rent him sooner or later. And it’s not like Boston’s OF will have any heavy hitters after moving Betts.if we keep mookie this year there is no chance we sign him in FA right? we are just pushing off the luxury tax reset to 2021? What would we even do with Pederson if we got him?
It's a great idea ... unless the Dodgers really like what the Angels are giving themSoxScout has a great idea on Twitter: LA should kill its deal with the LAA and the Sox should get Pederson and Stripling from LA as part of this deal. Maybe the Sox throw in a lottery ticket prospect to sweeten the pot slightly.
View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1225627265960226817?s=19
Stripling is at $2.1M......Pederson was supposed to have had his arbitration hearing yesterday ($9.5M / $7.75M), but haven't seen a decision yet. Seems like that could get a little tight with the cap unless the prospect added from the Sox side is significant enough to justify reducing their contribution to Price's contract.Sox Scout said that he's hearing the prospect(s) that the Dodgers are getting from the Angels wouldn't blow your socks off, but who knows how reliable his source is.
I'd be all for getting Pederson and Stripling back and throwing in someone else - or even an extra 2mil per year on Price's deal. We'd still be under the tax if I'm seeing these numbers correctly and it would be more pieces for Bloom to use at the deadline.
Except that Bloom wants a deal to happen.Bloom needs to set a deadline. They’re going to search for prospects now?
So if both sets of fans are pissed -- one because it happened, one because it didn't -- it must be a good trade.I don't think LA needs Mookie to be back to the WS. But man if they let this deal fail and they don't make it back, their fan base is going to roast them for not giving up their #2 or #3 prospect when they had a chance to get frigging Mookie Betts.
The trouble with this plan is Wil Myers will answer the phone.Good. Get an actual package back from LA or MN or say fuck it and call San Diego
umm..no. If BOTH sides are pissed that it happened OR did not happen, it must be a good trade. In your scenario, it wasn't. There was a winner (they're pissed because it did not happen; and there was a loser (they're pissed because it did).So if both sets of fans are pissed -- one because it happened, one because it didn't -- it must be a good trade.