Potential Trade Deadline Targets

strek1

Run, Forrest, run!
SoSH Member
Jun 13, 2006
32,882
Hartford area
It's ten spots plus you have to factor in the pool money lost from those spots. It's a big deal. Basically forces you to take an extra senior sign rather than anyone with upside above slot.
DD didn't seemed too alarmed about it. Said they frequently are interested in guys they think are going to get picked at #30 and they are still there are #40. But yeah the money issues are there. Maybe they should send Cherington the bill. He really hamstrung them with some brutal contracts.
 

Greg29fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
20,545
NC
Rays made out like bandits on both the Pham and Archer deals. I can’t believe the Pirates gave up that much for Archer, he’s just not that good.
Going from the AL East to the NL Central will help Archer a lot I think. The Pirates are stacked in the outfield at the ML level and still have Jason Martin and Bryan Reynolds in Indianapolis and Altoona.
 

InsideTheParker

persists in error
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,463
Pioneer Valley
DD didn't seemed too alarmed about it. Said they frequently are interested in guys they think are going to get picked at #30 and they are still there are #40. But yeah the money issues are there. Maybe they should send Cherington the bill. He really hamstrung them with some brutal contracts.
Some of us think DDski erred with the Price contract, but I don't feel like being yelled at again, okay?
 

DisgruntledSoxFan77

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 12, 2015
1,886
Quincy
Going from the AL East to the NL Central will help Archer a lot I think. The Pirates are stacked in the outfield at the ML level and still have Jason Martin and Bryan Reynolds in Indianapolis.
Not to mention his new pitching coach. I get the feeling his career will get better from here on out
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,629
I'd judge that the Nationals wanted to see if a Harper rental could return a package that would be worth more than just QO-ing Harper by enough of a margin to make it worth punting on the season. I would not surprised if the answers they got back suggested that's not the case. He's been awful.
He has an OPS+ of 121, leading the league in walks. He's not playing as well as he's shown he can, but he's not awful.
 

gedman211

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2016
2,844
The Nats not moving Herrera was a face-saving measure. The haul they would've gotten wasn't as good as the prospects they gave up to get him just 6 weeks ago. Hence the "we feel we're still in it" talk. In related news, Secretary McNamara has assured us that they're making tremendous strides against the Viet Kong.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Is it your money?

Or is it because of the draft choice sliding 10 spots?

I bet going over the limit pays off more than that slightly better draft choice does.
My biggest concern is the repeater tax when so many guys need to be reupped, the young kids need deals and the team has holes to fill for next year as is. If it means losing Kimbrel, not being able to fill the hole in the rotation and not resigning Mookie/X/etc, then yeah, I hope we stayed under, because it starts getting aggressive and short of Price opting out (which opens another hole), those things are real concerns; and those draft pick slides and IFA pool and draft pool deductions start adding up.
 

strek1

Run, Forrest, run!
SoSH Member
Jun 13, 2006
32,882
Hartford area
Some of us think DDski erred with the Price contract, but I don't feel like being yelled at again, okay?
I agree with you with that sentiment but Cherington sent out millions for zero return. Just with Pablo & Rusney.
DD not without mistakes but I like his approach for the most part.
 

InsideTheParker

persists in error
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,463
Pioneer Valley
I agree with you with that sentiment but Cherington sent out millions for zero return. Just with Pablo & Rusney.
DD not without mistakes but I like his approach for the most part.
I agree. I like the relatively low-cost moves like Moreland, Pearce, and Kinsler. You just seem to get more bang for the buck.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,696
Rays made out like bandits on both the Pham and Archer deals. I can’t believe the Pirates gave up that much for Archer, he’s just not that good.
Interesting, I thought Pham was a great trade but the Archer package seemed light. Meadows is injury-prone and has been terrible since a good first two weeks, and Glasnow is a failed starter.

Exciting to see the Rays getting weird though. Kiley McDaniel cited someone in the Rays organization liking Glasnow as a 2-5 inning guy designed to pitch "once through the order for 1-4 hitters and twice through the order for 5-9 hitters."
 

The Filthy One

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2005
3,530
Los Angeles
Another way to read the non-move for another reliever (and the mention of Eovaldi moving to the pen at some point) is that they must feel some confidence that Rodriguez will be back this year.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,038
St. Louis, MO
Another way to read the non-move for another reliever (and the mention of Eovaldi moving to the pen at some point) is that they must feel some confidence that Rodriguez will be back this year.
That's how I took it. Even if only as a reliever in October. Eovaldi really plugs two holes...the starter now and the reliever we needed for later (whether it be him or Rodriguez).
 

uncannymanny

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2007
9,265
My biggest concern is the repeater tax when so many guys need to be reupped, the young kids need deals and the team has holes to fill for next year as is. If it means losing Kimbrel, not being able to fill the hole in the rotation and not resigning Mookie/X/etc, then yeah, I hope we stayed under, because it starts getting aggressive and short of Price opting out (which opens another hole), those things are real concerns; and those draft pick slides and IFA pool and draft pool deductions start adding up.
Biggest concern for me too. Lots of money needing to be thrown around in the near future. Still carrying Sandoval next season too.
 

Maximus

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
5,787
Kelvin Herrera was their target and rightfully so last night then Rizzo decided not to sell. If the Nats continue to struggle maybe he'll clear waivers in August but doubtful.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I really, really hope that I'm wrong, but my gut reaction is that not adding another solid bullpen arm is gonna come back to haunt the Sox.
If it makes you feel better, there's a legitimate chance that any bullpen arm they would have gotten would have ended up sucking.

EDIT--I mean, it could have been Jake Diekman
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,038
St. Louis, MO
Kelvin Herrera was their target and rightfully so last night then Rizzo decided not to sell. If the Nats continue to struggle maybe he'll clear waivers in August but doubtful.
Yeah I saw Speier’s tweet. They can reevaluate in August, they’ll know if Kelly is fixable by then and have a larger sample size of Thornburg and Brasier.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,696
Of all the guys discussed I'm most shocked that Tyson Ross wasn't moved. One-year contract making $1.5 million, and Preller hung onto him long enough to watch him turn into a pumpkin this month and lose all his value.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,307
Portland
Of all the guys discussed I'm most shocked that Tyson Ross wasn't moved. One-year contract making $1.5 million, and Preller hung onto him long enough to watch him turn into a pumpkin this month and lose all his value.
He's probably someone they'll still extend a QO to since he still has positive value. Doubtful he'd make much. and at worst they could get a draft pick out of it.
 

strek1

Run, Forrest, run!
SoSH Member
Jun 13, 2006
32,882
Hartford area
I really, really hope that I'm wrong, but my gut reaction is that not adding another solid bullpen arm is gonna come back to haunt the Sox.
Don't forget you don't need 5 starters in the playoffs. You gain a couple of pen arms right there. Were/Are there really that many "Solid" bullpen arms out there "available" for low level prospects? Because that is essentially all we have. Yes we have a few good pieces but DD sounded like he didn't want to totally decimate the farm. We're pretty thin as it is. I think the MFY adding only Happ won't be enough. Lynn is just OK. Their starting staff is their biggest problem. Like Cafardo was saying if they don't get Severino straightened out they could have big problems in a 1 game playoff.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,522
If it makes you feel better, there's a legitimate chance that any bullpen arm they would have gotten would have ended up sucking.

EDIT--I mean, it could have been Jake Diekman
Right. I thought that only Hand and Herrera were above the pack. Everyone else is in the same box of chocolates as the guys they already have. Usually good. Occasionally not. Its not like the Sox lack numbers of those guys like they have in the past. They just sent a reasonably effective (until his last 2 games) Workman to AAA.
 

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
12,615
Don't forget you don't need 5 starters in the playoffs. You gain a couple of pen arms right there. Were/Are there really that many "Solid" bullpen arms out there "available" for low level prospects? Because that is essentially all we have. Yes we have a few good pieces but DD sounded like he didn't want to totally decimate the farm. We're pretty thin as it is. I think the MFY adding only Happ won't be enough. Lynn is just OK. Their starting staff is their biggest problem. Like Cafardo was saying if they don't get Severino straightened out they could have big problems in a 1 game playoff.
Eovaldi could be a downright filthy fireballer out of the 'pen in the playoffs. Esp as a ROOGY.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
66,534
Catching up on this thread and I had a question for those of you who follow this stuff and know how it works:

Is there any advantage under the current structure to hide where you are in relation to the salary cap for trade deadline purposes? Like, with respect to letting other teams know what you might be up to, etc.?
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
The Nats not moving Herrera was a face-saving measure. The haul they would've gotten wasn't as good as the prospects they gave up to get him just 6 weeks ago. Hence the "we feel we're still in it" talk. In related news, Secretary McNamara has assured us that they're making tremendous strides against the Viet Kong.
High likelihood ownership nixed Rizzo sell orders. Conflicting reports here on that — another report said Rizzo nixed the sell.

Not crazy to stand pat. It is August 2. They trail by 5 in both the division and WC.

In any case, they whacked Kintzler because he is a clubhouse lawyer and a suspected source of leaks. And they whacked Shawn Kelly because he showed up the manager.

Rizzo throwing lifeline to drowning rookie manager, Davey Martinez, who could control neither player.

Kelly having a decent year.
 
Last edited:

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,038
St. Louis, MO
High likelihood ownership nixed Rizzo sell orders. Conflicting reports here on that — another report said Rizzo nixed the sell.

Not crazy to stand pat. It is August 2. They trail by 5 in both the division and WC.

In any case, they whacked Kintzler because he is a clubhouse lawyer and a suspected source of leaks. And they whacked Shawn Kelly because he showed up the manager.

Rizzo throwing lifeline to drowning rookie manager, Davey Martinez, who could control neither player.

Kelly having a decent year.
Side question but what’s the local scuttle on Martinez? He appears to be in over his head, enough to where they’d even miss Dusty.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Side question but what’s the local scuttle on Martinez? He appears to be in over his head, enough to where they’d even miss Dusty.
In over his head, struggling like a rookie.

There is a good amount of Dusty love. Say what you want, but he did manage essentially the same team as this one to 95 and 97 win seasons. And Martinez’ weakness — managing people — is Dusty’s strength. There is 2011-Red Sox-level bullshit here this year, and it’s inconceivable that it would have happened under Dusty. Players respected him too much.

It is not lost on the fan base that Rizzo wanted Dusty back and ownership vetoed — because of money. The Lerners will pay players, not managers — there is a lengthy track record, including refusing to hire Bud Black, Rizzo’s preferred candidate over Dusty, several years back.

The money paid to managers here is a rounding error. Fans are pissed. Yes, Dusty had problems in the playoffs and as a tactician — but it’s incredibly arrogant to presume 95-win seasons as some kind of irreducible baseline that a new manager cannot fuck up.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,596
Maine
Wasn't Dusty preceeded by Matt Williams, whose tenure ended with clubhouse turmoil and literal fist-fights in the dugout (Papelbon vs Harper)? Think they'd learn by now.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
888
Maryland
I think Rizzo thought Williams was a leader. He wasn't. Dusty was a leader, but wasn't a strategist (neither was Williams). Bud Black would have been better than either.

I live in Maryland, work in DC, and follow the Nats and go to games now and then. I don't get the sense that fans are pining for Dusty. I don't think fans generally think that Martinez is responsible for the Nats problems. He has certainly struggled in some respects, but I think most of the supposed clubhouse grumbling is simply a reflection of the old adage that winning teams have great chemistry, while you can always find problems on teams that aren't winning - especially on teams that are expected to win, but don't.

Most of the complaints I hear from Nats fans are about the injuries and the players not performing. Murphy and Eaton both missed a big chunk of the first half - I think everyone expected the Nats to go on a roll once they were back, but it hasn't happened. And there's a good bit of grumbling about Stras not being about to stay healthy. And Harper having a bad year - at least in terms of BA (but still drawing a lot of walks - looks to me like he's been pressing, trying to make things happen, and chasing too many pitches out of the zone). Zimmerman has been awful (thank goodness they picked up Matt Adams), and catcher has been a year-long problem. I think the fans are a lot more focused on these things than they are Dave Martinez.
 
Last edited:

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
That’s a different perspective on the Nats; thanks for offering it.

Here is another from a good columnist —

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/sports/nationals/mike-rizzo-had-to-shore-up-the-nationals-clubhouse-because-dave-martinez-couldnt/2018/08/01/23e2c74c-95bb-11e8-810c-5fa705927d54_story.html

The rookie manager is made of porcelain. Nats have to protect him rather than be led by him. Rizzo had to whack two serviceable pieces (the bullpen is not deep) to protect the manager and the culture.

It bears emphasis that the two “troublemakers” were JAGs. Not guys like sulking Nomar or out-of-control Manny, who had to be dealt given their stature and potential for disruption.
 

m0ckduck

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,010
What’s the reason for the August waiver period, anyway? Whom does it benefit? Why do we have it, as opposed to simply having a “hard” trade deadline? Is it to give players a chance at freedom who are stuck on teams that don’t want them? Like the Rule V draft?

I’ve been following baseball for almost 40 years and suddenly realize I have no idea and have always just unquestioningly accepted the practice.
 

SirPsychoSquints

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
5,674
Pittsburgh, PA
What’s the reason for the August waiver period, anyway? Whom does it benefit? Why do we have it, as opposed to simply having a “hard” trade deadline? Is it to give players a chance at freedom who are stuck on teams that don’t want them? Like the Rule V draft?

I’ve been following baseball for almost 40 years and suddenly realize I have no idea and have always just unquestioningly accepted the practice.
What would the rule be, exactly? Teams have to be allowed to bump people off their 25 man, and they can't get a free pass to send them to the minors if they don't have options.

Edit: Just to point out - the August deadline is simply the deadline for when players have to be in the system in order to be eligible for the post-season.
 

m0ckduck

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,010
What would the rule be, exactly? Teams have to be allowed to bump people off their 25 man, and they can't get a free pass to send them to the minors if they don't have options.

Edit: Just to point out - the August deadline is simply the deadline for when players have to be in the system in order to be eligible for the post-season.
Thanks for the explanation— I'd never made the connection.