Would you Trade Xander Bogaerts for Giancarlo Stanton?

[a700hitter]

Fred, you are the poster boy for Old School.

There is nothing wrong with old school. New school isn't doing so great.

[sk7326]

I agree exactly with you. Xander Bogaerts doesn't have as high a ceiling as a hitter as Stanton. If you want to look at each of their campaigns at 21 years old, they don't even compare. Stanton mashed 34 hrs when he was 21 and hit .262 while xander is hitting in the .230's with only 6 hrs and low rbi's because of his terrible ba with risp. In addition, Xander never absolutely raked at the triple a level. Sure .284 with 9 hrs and a .822 ops is not to shabby at all in pawtucket through 60 games, but it's not eye popping like stanton's numbers were. Before stanton got called up in 2010, he was mashing the ball in triple a. He had a 1.171 ops with 21 hrs and a .313 average through 53 games. Xander never demolished triple a like stanton did. Although I think Xander will turn out to be a very good player, I think Stanton has much more offensive potential than him and is much more proven. When you take into account that xander never absolutely raked in the minors and also take into account that xander is not even an average defender currently, it becomes obvious in my opinion that a xander for stanton trade is a no brainer.

 

1. Yes, trading Bogaerts for Stanton makes sense

2. The position things matters a lot - and Bogaerts bull evaluation is based on being a SS. That's the tricky part of the evaluation - the Sox moved him to 3B because 3B was horrible for them and there were solutions at SS. But if his reality is as a 3B, things become trickier. Anyway, slump has been a problem - but not a reason to necessarily quit on a 21 year old. Sox have mishandled aspects of their kids all season - although some of it was well intentioned.

[Orange Juiced]

One way or another, this thread should provide some good laughs in 2 or 3 years. Stanton is a legit powerhouse star. Take him out of that pitcher friendly ballpark and he will provide real fireworks. XB doesn't have Stanton's ceiling.

 

I agree with you. And I would do the proposed deal, mainly for three reasons: (1) Stanton's ceiling is higher than Bogaerts', (2) Stanton is already, despite being very young, a proven MLB player, and (3) the Sox have Betts and Marrero as prospects (well, Betts is obviously in the majors now), along with Brock Holt (who I think is a pretty solid player, though not as good as his current stats suggest), all of whom can play SS for the Sox. They have no real OF prospects worth mentioning. Certainly nothing close to Stanton.

 

As for the premium position argument, it remains to be seen if he will be a good SS. They had to move him to 3rd this season.

 

They did not have to move him to SS. They moved him because Middlebrooks was hurt and the easiest and cheapest (in terms of prospects; Drew just cost money) way to solve the problem was to simply sign Drew and move Bogaerts to 3b, a place where he was successful last year in limited time. Finding a solid SS/3b replacement was easier given that Drew was available, and no quality 3b was without costing the team prospects. The Drew to SS, X to 3b play was really the simplest and cheapest way to solve the problem the team faced. I don't think it was because they couldn't have X at short.

 

I just hope that when we revisit this thread in a couple of years that Stanton is not launching rockets for the Yankees.

 

Or Lester dealing from the mound.

[Bellhorn04]

I would trade Bogaerts for Stanton. The question is who else would they want along with Bogaerts.

[SoxFanForsyth]

The problem is that you've got 2 years of Stanton left before he hits FA.

 

Compare that against having Bogaerts for 6 years.

 

If you cut a deal with Stanton, you wouldn't be getting him for 2 years of arbitration money because, if you're giving up Bogaerts, you better have a 8 year deal cut out with this guy. So now you're looking at 8/180 or 8/200 for him, and no Bogaerts.

 

It's not just talent for talent.

[Bellhorn04]

The problem is that you've got 2 years of Stanton left before he hits FA.

 

Compare that against having Bogaerts for 6 years.

 

If you cut a deal with Stanton, you wouldn't be getting him for 2 years of arbitration money because, if you're giving up Bogaerts, you better have a 8 year deal cut out with this guy. So now you're looking at 8/180 or 8/200 for him, and no Bogaerts.

 

Agreed, doing it for only 2 years of Stanton wouldn't work.

[Spudboy]

What moron would want Stanton for only two years??????

 

Obviously he would be an investment in the future for the Sox.

[SoxFanForsyth]

What moron would want Stanton for only two years??????

 

Obviously he would be an investment in the future for the Sox.

 

So you want to give up Bogaerts, a potential superstar, for the rights to negotiate with Stanton and give him 8/200? So, pay your best prospect to have exclusive rights to pay Stanton enormous money and buy out his two arbitration years?

 

Doesn't make sense. Wait until he hits FA at this point. If he had 4-5 years of team control left, fine. But otherwise you're paying for him twice.

[a700hitter]

They did not have to move him to SS. They moved him because Middlebrooks was hurt and the easiest and cheapest (in terms of prospects; Drew just cost money) way to solve the problem was to simply sign Drew and move Bogaerts to 3b, a place where he was successful last year in limited time. Finding a solid SS/3b replacement was easier given that Drew was available, and no quality 3b was without costing the team prospects. The Drew to SS, X to 3b play was really the simplest and cheapest way to solve the problem the team faced. I don't think it was because they couldn't have X at short.

In retrospect, the best and cheapest alternative would have been to let Holt play 3rd.

[Palodios]

If there is anything we should have learned from this season, it is that prospects don't always perform immediately. Maybe it'll take 2-3 years for Xander to start hitting his peak seasons. Then he is the one only controlled for 2 years at peak production.

[a700hitter]

XB's growng pains may be just that, and he may go on to become a star. However, even if he becomes a star, I don't think anyone projects him to come close to becoming the offensive force that Stanton is. On that basis alone, there is a strong argument to make the deal and bring Stanton in as the centerpiece of the team's future.

 

We should not be overlook the possibility that XB's difficulties are not growing pains but rather an indication the he might not be become a star. If that turns out to be the case, trading him now for Stanton would be a steal.

 

In summary, if XB becomes a star, we will still be debating whether this was a good trade, because Stanton will be a mega star. If XB doesn't live up to expectaions, the deal would be a huge win for the Sox. I would eliminate the downside risk of XB flopping while being secure in my opinion that XB will never approach being the offensive force that Stanton is.

Edited July 16, 2014 by a700hitter

[SoxFanForsyth]

XB's growng pains may be just that, and he may go on to become a star. However, even if he becomes a star, I don't think anyone projects him to come close to becoming the offensive force that Stanton is. On that basis alone, there is a strong argument to make the deal and bring Stanton in as the centerpiece of the team's future.

 

We should not be overlook the possibility that XB's difficulties are not growing pains but rather an indication the he might not be become a star. If that turns out to be the case, trading him now for Stanton would be a steal.

 

In summary, if XB becomes a star, we will still be debating whether this was a good trade, because Stanton will be a mega star. If XB doesn't live up to expectaions, the deal would be a huge win for the Sox. I would eliminate the downside risk of XB flopping while being secure in my opinion that XB will never approach being the offensive force that Stanton is.

 

Ok so here's the thing.

 

XB isn't a star right now. The good news? Neither are the Red Sox. So why trade XB for Stanton when Stanton isn't going to give you anything at all this season? Why would you trade a cost controlled future superstar for a current superstar who will cost you 8/$200mm? Not only that, but you put that on the books and then what do you do with Lester? And if you don't sign Lester, who do you have pitching for you? Who do you have at SS and 3B next year?

 

Trading for Stanton has a huge domino effect.

[a700hitter]

Ok so here's the thing.

 

XB isn't a star right now. The good news? Neither are the Red Sox. So why trade XB for Stanton when Stanton isn't going to give you anything at all this season? Why would you trade a cost controlled future superstar for a current superstar who will cost you 8/$200mm? Not only that, but you put that on the books and then what do you do with Lester? And if you don't sign Lester, who do you have pitching for you? Who do you have at SS and 3B next year?

 

Trading for Stanton has a huge domino effect.

I explaine why. Making the deal has less downside. The only downside is accelerating a payroll increase.

[SoxFanForsyth]

I explaine why. Making the deal has less downside. The only downside is accelerating a payroll increase.

 

the downside is trading Bogaerts for 2 years of Stanton. Two years, that's it. Otherwise just sign him when he hits FA.

[a700hitter]

the downside is trading Bogaerts for 2 years of Stanton. Two years, that's it. Otherwise just sign him when he hits FA.

We are the Boston Red Sox not the KC Royals. We have the resources to sign him now and make him the centerpiece for the future.

[SoxFanForsyth]

We are the Boston Red Sox not the KC Royals. We have the resources to sign him now and make him the centerpiece for the future.

 

I understand that. But why would you trade Bogaerts for just 2 years of Stanton when you can just go pay for Stanton beginning in 2017? That's the question.

 

You want to trade Bogaerts for Tulo? I'm on board. But not for a guy who is hitting FA in only 2 years.

[a700hitter]

I understand that. But why would you trade Bogaerts for just 2 years of Stanton when you can just go pay for Stanton beginning in 2017? That's the question.

 

You want to trade Bogaerts for Tulo? I'm on board. But not for a guy who is hitting FA in only 2 years.

As I said earlier, I think Bogaerts for Stanton is an arguably good deal even if Bogaerts becomes a star. The trade would also eliminate the risk of Bogaerts being a bust.

[BigPapi]

1. Yes, trading Bogaerts for Stanton makes sense

2. The position things matters a lot - and Bogaerts bull evaluation is based on being a SS. That's the tricky part of the evaluation - the Sox moved him to 3B because 3B was horrible for them and there were solutions at SS. But if his reality is as a 3B, things become trickier. Anyway, slump has been a problem - but not a reason to necessarily quit on a 21 year old. Sox have mishandled aspects of their kids all season - although some of it was well intentioned.

 

That is true that it was based off being a SS. However, he is a below average fielder at both short and third as he already has 13 errors and a - 1.2 dwar. I know there is still plenty of time for him to become a better fielder on the left side of the infield, but the evaluation as a short stop goes right out the window if he cannot adequately field the position. If he can't field like an average ss or third basemen, you can't compare his power or hitting prowess to other short stops. Its like comparing david ortiz's power to other short stop's and saying that he has plus plus power for a short stop (thats an exaggeration).

Edited July 16, 2014 by BigPapi

[RedSoxNC84]

Keep the farm. Let Vic come back and trade him once he's performing well again, trade Lester and koji for prospects, trade Buch if he can keep up his current streak and shows some value. DFA the s*** out of Mujica. Keep Gomes and Nava for your bench. Only trade blocked prospects like Marerro. Build the team around Owens, Bogaerts, Betts, etc.

 

This is only if they do go into a selling scenario

[seabeachfred]

I understand that. But why would you trade Bogaerts for just 2 years of Stanton when you can just go pay for Stanton beginning in 2017? That's the question.

 

You want to trade Bogaerts for Tulo? I'm on board. But not for a guy who is hitting FA in only 2 years.

 

You and others assume that Bogaerts is going to be a star, maybe a superstar but what if he doesn't get much better? What if he continues to stink in clutch situations and keeps failing with runners on base and becomes even more error prone than he is now? It could happen. He wouldn't be the first highly rated player to become a lot less than was predicted for him. Stanton has already shown he has the goods and the power that would light up Fenway Park...a RH slugger personified.

 

Between his miserable hitting or lack of same with RISP, his fielding woes in the field and his sensitive nature (that was how the Red Sox described him, not me), we may yet have a star but we may also be stuck with a lemon. Stanton for Bogey, and a couple of others to me sounds like a deal we should make......if we really can.

[Behindenemylines]

The Sox are high on Marrero (AAA) who is better defensively at SS, and is starting to hit the ball. Though he will never hit like Bogaerts if he is going to be a productive major league SS then you would have to think about a Bogaerts / Stanton trade. The Sox have no power bats in the OF, and known on the way. To say no is not right, you have at least think about it.

[MJantomaso]

The Sox have a farm that has exceptional talent on the left side of the IF. When I look at this trade, I solely base my decision with an offensive point of view due to the poor defense XB has displayed in his ML career thus far. I understand that XB is young and has an extremely high ceiling, yet so does Stanton at only 25 years of age. When you look at the past decade of teams that have won a championship, who (other than the Yankees) have had a stud offensive shortstop? I am taking the PROVEN talent of Stanton now, over the potential of XB. Its a risk I would feel more than comfortable taking. With the Monster only 310' away, I would project Stanton's numbers to get significantly better than they already are. Boston has more than enough room in their wallet to sign him long term so that does not worry me at all.

[BigPapi]

The Sox have a farm that has exceptional talent on the left side of the IF. When I look at this trade, I solely base my decision with an offensive point of view due to the poor defense XB has displayed in his ML career thus far. I understand that XB is young and has an extremely high ceiling, yet so does Stanton at only 25 years of age. When you look at the past decade of teams that have won a championship, who (other than the Yankees) have had a stud offensive shortstop? I am taking the PROVEN talent of Stanton now, over the potential of XB. Its a risk I would feel more than comfortable taking. With the Monster only 310' away, I would project Stanton's numbers to get significantly better than they already are. Boston has more than enough room in their wallet to sign him long term so that does not worry me at all.

 

Your right on the point. If you look at projected top short stops over the past 10 years who were top 10 prospects, a lot of the names on it scare you. In 2006, Brandon Wood was the top ss prospect and a scout touted him as the next Cal Ripken ( which obviously he isn't). The number 5 prospect in 2006 was Stephen Drew, who hasn't had a terrible career but hasn't been a superstar by any means. 2004 Kazuo Matsui, 2005 Joel Guzman, 2012 Jurickson Profar. Virtually all of the top 10 rated ss prospects in the last 10 years have underperformed and a good number of them aren't even serviceable players. Now I'm not saying Xander isn't going to be a good player, but why not take the proven talent over the unproven one? Also having Stanton only down for 2 years isn't a bad thing. If he produces like a superstart, I have faith the sox will resign him. If not, they can let him walk.

Edited July 17, 2014 by BigPapi

[Navafan29]

Trade for Stanton if you're going to go all-in and try for another championship. Don't just be the Mariners and waste all your money on a Cano without getting anyone else and miss the playoffs. It doesn't matter much if you improve from a last place team to a 3rd place team.

[a700hitter]

Your right on the point. If you look at projected top short stops over the past 10 years who were top 10 prospects, a lot of the names on it scare you. In 2006, Brandon Wood was the top ss prospect and a scout touted him as the next Cal Ripken ( which obviously he isn't). The number 5 prospect in 2006 was Stephen Drew, who hasn't had a terrible career but hasn't been a superstar by any means. 2004 Kazuo Matsui, 2005 Joel Guzman, 2012 Jurickson Profar. Virtually all of the top 10 rated ss prospects in the last 10 years have underperformed and a good number of them aren't even serviceable players. Now I'm not saying Xander isn't going to be a good player, but why not take the proven talent over the unproven one? Also having Stanton only down for 2 years isn't a bad thing. If he produces like a superstart, I have faith the sox will resign him. If not, they can let him walk.

Great post. Brandon Wood was a huge power hitter in the minors, but couldn't make enough contact in the majors.

[Navafan29]

I just traded Ryan Lavarnway, Mike Carp, and Jonathon Herrera for Giancarlo Stanton in MLB 14 The Show.

[MJantomaso]

I just traded Ryan Lavarnway, Mike Carp, and Jonathon Herrera for Giancarlo Stanton in MLB 14 The Show.

 

That means that should work in real life right?

[BigPapi]

To keep it in perspective, from 2000 to 2012 ( I stopped at 2012 because any prospects younger than the harper are trout class are still too young to judge), 48.5 percent of the top 10 baseball prospects rated by baseball america have been all star's at least once, so recent history tells us that there is no guarantee top 10 prospects become all stars. For top two prospects, like xander was rated, 73 percent of them from 2000 to 2012 have been all stars. Edited July 18, 2014 by BigPapi

[Behindenemylines]

At this point Miami would have to be so over whelmed to even think about trading Stanton. Marlins won't start thinking about dealing him until he gets closer to being a FA.