Miggy's future value is the $184M question. I took a quick look as follows: Miggy Marcels projected bWAR = 2.94 age 35 season. Decrement that value by 0.5 WAR/year as assumed aging and this total expected bWAR age 35 through 40 is 10.1 - not a great player and in fact less than a starter as soon as three years into the remaining six years.Well yes, over the course of his career, Cabrera is one of the greatest RH hitters in the history of the sport. That's not the question. The question is what kind of hitter is he NOW and what kind of hitter will he be over the rest of his contract. I daresay it would be incredibly optimistic to think he will be nearly as good moving forward as he has been in the past.
I did the exact same thing today. I think the Tigers would have to eat a lot to make it worth it, though even then the Sox would have a bad and untradeable 1st base/DH for a few of those years.Miggy's future value is the $184M question. I took a quick look as follows: Miggy Marcels projected bWAR = 2.94 age 35 season. Decrement that value by 0.5 WAR/year as assumed aging and this total expected bWAR age 35 through 40 is 10.1 - not a great player and in fact less than a starter as soon as three years into the remaining six years.
I'd try to make Pomeranz, X, Groome, Swihart work. This lets them compete in 2018, gives them an extra year of control in X, and a couple of prospects , even if the shine is off Swiharts bloomSo what do folks think is a fair offer for Machado? I hope it's not the X/ERod/Chavis offer I've heard floated (Cafardo?). That seems like a vast overpay for one year of Manny.
Assuming we're offering X (to avoid the complication of flipping him elsewhere), and understanding that the O's want pitching,, I think X + ERod is still too much for one year. X + Brian Johnson? And maybe add an expendable middle reliever, or a mid-level prospect (Sharwyn, who pitched for Maryland)?
Or maybe we have to make it a three-way deal - if Duquette wants two young SPs, maybe we can pick them up in a deal for X, and flip them to the Os.
MLBPA outside council for the last 20 yrs (DOJ head for Obama, cant recall her name) is a big believer that work stoppages are not an option when economic stakes are high for both sides (co-wrote a paper to that affect). While she may be right, you got to at least show that hand since it really is a unions main leverage. Got to bluff to win at poker. Mutually Assured Destruction has been known to work, but only if you show the capability and willingness to push the button when forced up against the wall. If you announce you have unilaterally disarmed you likely go up in smoke. That smell is the MLBPA burning.I can't really speak to that, I'm just passing on what my friend said. I could be that they don't have to negotiate against amateur players for MLB money; he also mentioned Perfect Game by name as someone charging an awful lot (and controlling the pipeline, maybe the PU thinks that should be under their aegis?)
Again, I can't say for certain and I don't want to misrepresent my discussion as a Union position. I think the PU got taken in the last negotiation, and lay the blame at Clark's feet, but ultimately their membership ratified the deal (my friend mentioned that it sounded like the PU was really worried about a work stoppage, but that seems really unlikely to me). The PU would seem to be juggling several different interests, from different player factions to maintaining competitive balance, but I really can't figure out how they let spending get tamped down on bring in new talent (IFA, drafted players) without also then directing the remaining money towards veterans by easing the CBT. That seemed like a no-brainer, so the issue is figuring out why it happened...
Even if he follows this fairly conservative track, that’s “worth” $80MM in free agency. So yeah, if the Tigers add $100m in cash and/or player assets and take back Hanley, then Miggy would “cost” us roughly 6/$70M as a full-time DH.Miggy's future value is the $184M question. I took a quick look as follows: Miggy Marcels projected bWAR = 2.94 age 35 season. Decrement that value by 0.5 WAR/year as assumed aging and this total expected bWAR age 35 through 40 is 10.1 - not a great player and in fact less than a starter as soon as three years into the remaining six years.
Data below, apologies for not knowing how to post excel table.
Age 35 36 37 38 39 40
bWAR 2.94 2.44 1.94 1.44 0.94 0.44
Wouldn't be surprised to hear latter that DD was indeed exploring various 3rd party ways he might be able to spin Xander into Machado.
I’m not Al Avila, but I see two good reasons.Yes if the tigers pay his whole contract he is a bargain. Why would they do that, if his numbers are as encouraging as so many people are saying?
Notably, he did not get surgery for that. Obviously that's up to the orthopedic surgeon's discretion and often these injuries "get better" (i.e. stop hurting) on their own. If I recall correctly, Randy Johnson struggled with herniated discs throughout his career.He had a ruptured disc in his back. If he's healed.
This can be a good thing as surgery is not always the best solution. The injuries really don't stop hurting on there own. Weight loss, conditioning and PT with knowledge trainer stop it from hurting. Chiropractic care can also help. It is a livable injury and Miggy can return from it. However, it is always looming in the background. If he does not keep up with the conditioning, PT and weight loss it can come back in a serious way. In my case a simple cough from a cold put we out for 3 months.Notably, he did not get surgery for that. Obviously that's up to the orthopedic surgeon's discretion and often these injuries "get better" (i.e. stop hurting) on their own. If I recall correctly, Randy Johnson struggled with herniated discs throughout his career.
Cargo's overall and road w/RC+ the past three seasons - more relevant because of the Coors factor.I`ll start out by saying don`t want JDM for over 5/100. Which won`t get him. I`d rather just sign Carlos Gonzalez and Tony Watson then call it the off season. Get Brentz and Cargo some time at 1st in ST. See if Swihart can become the super utility guy. He might turn into a pretty good trade chip if he can move around the field and still catch a little.
Names exchanged don’t mean they’re all in a final deal. The O’s are probably drawing limited interest for 1 year of Manny, certainly at their asking price, but since I’d like to see him sign signed long term, I think getting him a full year in Boston as the starting SS might make him more comfortable signing here (or least save the team from a long term mistake if it won’t work out). Since Chavis has limited utility to the Sox now (and I’m not high on him), I’d be willing to use him to headline a Machado deal; then trade Xander for prospects (maybe some have to also go to B’Mor) to team looking for cost control at SS to compete for two years.That would be highway robbery for Baltimore.
August he started hitting better and September looked closer to his old self. He`s mainly an OFer. I mentioned 1st just because I`d like to see more bench players being able to play multiple positions. His spray chart for Fenway looks pretty good. Not sure if I can post it. Have no idea what he would cost but for 1 year pillow contract could be a steal.Cargo's overall and road w/RC+ the past three seasons - more relevant because of the Coors factor.
I know in general players perform worse on the road, but his increasingly fesh numbers don't look promising. His overall power is to right and center too. They already have two below average 1b/DH types. I don't see the need for another.
In a hypothetical 10/350 Machado extension, would that preclude the extensions of Sale and Betts?Machado instead of JDM is something I can definitely get behind. Using Chavis or Groome as the centerpiece wild require a negotiating window, IMO. But I'd go 10/350 to get that done.
FWIW no one hit the ball more than 95 mph more times than Machado last year and he had the 17th highest average exit velocity. 3 spots higher than JD.
I'd be happy to bet on a return to form in 2018.
No more so than signing JD.In a hypothetical 10/350 Machado extension, would that preclude the extensions of Sale and Betts?
Rephrased—can they hold three 300 million dollar contracts on the same roster?No more so than signing JD.
Edit: And to be less glib, Machado would instantly be the best non-pitcher on the team (and maybe the best overall player). You get him locked up first and sort out the rest later.
Plus, I don't think Sale is likely to stay anyway, and since he's loved up, more or less, through his prime, I'm not sure a long term 30+ million AAV contact for him would be the best idea.
Mookie would still be affordable given the expiring contacts of Hanley, Panda, Kimbrel, and not needing to extend Bogaerts anymore.
This could be a big issue. if they're not resigning Sale and using the payroll flexibility on Mookie and Machado, then who's pitching?Rephrased—can they hold three 300 million dollar contracts on the same roster?
The real question is where is the ace? If Price opts out you can buy one. Otherwise you're more likely hoping he's a #2 and Edro is healthy. They have a bunch of middle to back of the rotation types in the pipeline.This could be a big issue. if they're not resigning Sale and using the payroll flexibility on Mookie and Machado, then who's pitching?
Pomeranz, Sale, Porcello and maybe Price may all be gone within a couple years. The farm system is barren. Especially if Groome goes.
This team needs to start developing pitching again. Felix Doubront should not be the only somewhat successful starter to come out of the farm in the past decade. No I don't count EdRo.
Off topic probably, but I think Keuchel qualifies.The real question is where is the ace? If Price opts out you can buy one. Otherwise you're more likely hoping he's a #2 and Edro is healthy. They have a bunch of middle to back of the rotation types in the pipeline.
Of course, Houston had no ace at the deadline this past July, so that is sometimes addressable in season.
I really think they're gonna have to develop one. Or develop something. They don't have the resources otherwise.The real question is where is the ace? If Price opts out you can buy one. Otherwise you're more likely hoping he's a #2 and Edro is healthy. They have a bunch of middle to back of the rotation types in the pipeline.
Of course, Houston had no ace at the deadline this past July, so that is sometimes addressable in season.
If Chavis and Groom was enough to put Machado in a Sox uniform DD would have already pulled the trigger.FWIW.
Hypothetically speaking, the Sox would have to be pretty bat crazy to blindly hand $350m over right now to a guy who just OPS'd .782 on the season (.826 in that "huge" second half rebound), and might not even bring one elite skillset to the table after a move to full time SS.In a hypothetical 10/350 Machado extension, would that preclude the extensions of Sale and Betts?
Correct. The price would probably be more than both of them. Especially to deal in the division. I know hes leaving Baltimore at the end of the season but still seems like that’s a bargain for the Sox. If they do this deal I would actually bet that Xander doesn’t get moved. It’s a nice counter to Stanton. But they need to have some type of assurance that he would resign.If Chavis and Groom was enough to put Machado in a Sox uniform DD would have already pulled the trigger.
Baltimore isn't making that deal. Which then enters a need to get the potential return on Xander squared away upfront for that possibility to go anywhere.
If you adjust for 3% inflation, which is a light estimate then the biggest contracts are closer to 300,000,000. A-Rod's would easily eclipse any hypothetical Harper and Machado deal in history since he made 252,000,000 16 years ago.For all this talk of $300 million dollar contracts, there has only been one such contract in MLB history, and it was spread over a 13-year time period. There have only been 12 contracts over $200 million and other than Stanton and ARod's 2 contracts, none have been higher than $250 million. And a good portion of those quickly became albatrosses.
I have no doubt that the market continues to change and evolve and that there are some big name players on the horizon in free agency or for extensions, but I guess I'll believe it when I see it in 2018/19. And I'm not sure I'd want to be the team holding any of these hypothetical decade-long contracts that devote 20% of the payroll to 1 player.
This is especially true if Bogaerts isn't part of the trade package--Machado isn't going to want to play third here when he's almost certainly a better defensive shortstop than the incumbent. If Bogaerts isn't here and the Sox can promise Machado the SS job, that might improve our chances slightly, I would think. But you're probably still right, which is why a straight-up Bogaerts-for-Machado deal seems like an overpay on our part, if anything (i.e., two years of Bogaerts is worth more than one year of Machado; Machado provides more surplus value, but probably not twice as much). Certainly adding Eduardo would make it a clear overpay.And, more relevant to this thread, I can't see any reason at all why Machado wouldn't test the market. It is very likely he won't be thrilled about a trade to Boston so why commit unless DD massively overpays.
Encarnacion took a three-year deal because he was 34 years old. Martinez is 30--If he takes a pillow contract it'll be for one year, not three.Dream scenario: trade for Machado and JD’s market never develops so he takes and Encarnacion-like three year deal, meaning his deal is done before Betts hits free agency.
Swapping Xander out for Machado actually only puts us in the market for a SS one year early. Assuming DD isn't operating under some Chris Sale countdown clock, it would also play towards an end that sees the Sox ideally wanting to get back under the LT a year from now. Even if it ultimately meant you were going to be left easing up on the gas pedal after this season as we transition into a multi year re-tool period (and not a full rebuild type scenario).2018 is the best possible opportunity for this team to win a World Series for at least the next half-decade and possibly longer. And while Chavis and Groome are easily the best prospects in the system, neither projects to be a likely game-changer. So I would be fine cashing them in to win in 2018 -- they are not going to be the difference between the 2021 Red Sox being good or not being good.
That said, Machado seems like an odd fit. You're certainly not going to play him at 3B, not with Devers slated to play an important role for the next 5+ years and Machado wanting to play SS. So he only makes sense if you assume that you're not going to re-sign Bogaerts long-term anyway -- best-case scenario, you re-sign Machado; worst-case, you're in the SS market a couple years earlier than you'd planned. Okay. But then you have to have a plan for a Bogaerts trade that either makes you better now or extends the window, and it's hard to imagine that coming together right now.
The logic of 1) signing JD Martinez, 2) being prepared to trade Chavis and/or Groome for an impact rental if needed in July, 3) looking for high-upside relief arms who could help replace Kimbrel, and 4) trying to figure out which of Bogaerts/Bradley won't be here long-term and making a trade after the season to try to extend the window still seems pretty obvious to me.