Stanton - U- B-Sox-GM

[BstHcpr]

I realize Stanton is to be paid $25-32M every year until 2027 and then has a $10M buyout on another $25M option, but the luxury tax hit is just $25M.

 

For a stud like Stanton, $25M is cheap.

 

The M's do NOT need to pay salary or take on salary to trade GS.

 

HE IS NOT A SALARY DUMP PLAYER!

 

He's worth every penny and then some. Somebody will pay it.

 

The issue is "paying it" PLUS giving up several top prospects. One or the other is fine, but both is almost always a no-no.

 

The Sale trade was great, because Sale is making way less than market value.

 

I think that opt out puts a lot of uncertainty on his value too. If he's this guy going forward, you only have him for two years.

[moonslav59]

I think that opt out puts a lot of uncertainty on his value too. If he's this guy going forward, you only have him for two years.

 

That should lessen the return package, yet people are acting like his contract is a salary dump one.

[mvp 78]

They aren't going to win a WS by 2020. You trade him for assets that could be part of a WS contender in the future.

[Slasher9]

as stated for the past 2 years...give miami whatever they want for stanton.

[Kimmi]

as stated for the past 2 years...give miami whatever they want for stanton.

 

No way.

[Northern Star]

as stated for the past 2 years...give miami whatever they want for stanton.

 

[Behindenemylines]

as stated for the past 2 years...give miami whatever they want for stanton.

 

Stanton gets hurt (Price) then what? All of that money tied up in one player is not where the Sox need to go. They would ask for Devers and Benny and that is young controllable players with a lot of upside. If you could get him without giving up Devers and Benny then maybe you could think about it. My fear would be that he would come to Boston and become what Judge has become (second half) for the Yankees. The bright lights of Boston has that effect. Right now he is playing in a stress free situation with the Marlins. So I would think real long before trading a Devers or Benny who have show that Boston doesn't seem to bother them.

[S5Dewey]

What they're asking for Stanton and what they'd get are two different things.

 

As Moon has said repeatedly, for the Sox to sign Stanton would be a double-whammy. They'd not only have to give up prime talent they'd also be stuck with a player's salary that would seriously hamper future acquisitions.

 

I'd be willing to part with Beni because that would open up a defensive spot for Stanton. I'd also be willing to lose Bogaerts because, frankly, I think he's overrated and replaceable AND you do 'have to give to get'. Toss in Swihart and a couple of ML relievers and we've got the start of a deal.

 

Something like that would be manageable for the Sox because they'd be taking on salary without giving up pieces vital to the future and manageable for the M's because they'd be getting young, talented players to build around.

 

The important thing to remember is that the Sox don't NEED Stanton to win their division. They're doing that without him. He's more of a "want" than a "need". If the two teams can't put together a trade that benefits both teams then we walk away.

[Jack Flap]

I could see giving up something built around Benintendi, a couple of good prospects, and some other pieces...but definitely not "whatever they want." If that's not enough to do it, then too bad.

 

Again, I think some people are really overestimating what it should take. He's having an incredible season, but this is not pre-arb Mike Trout we're talking about here.

[OH FOY]

as stated for the past 2 years...give miami whatever they want for stanton.

 

Miami asks for Devers, Benni, and Chavis you make that Trade? I don't see them wanting Bogey or Bradley. Just because of years of control, and Agent.

You make this Trade you kill the Sox for years, for 1 player. No 3rd baseman, in a couple of years only Outfielder you will have is Stanton.

It will cost more than just Stanton's Contract in the long run. You will need to sign FA's galore.(What's in the Farm for Outfielders and 3rd baseman)?

Pitching wins championships. Stay on track. Kids are fine here.

Edited September 2, 2017 by OH FOY!

[jacksonianmarch]

Stanton is going nowhere. Jeter is taking over and I don't think he will want his major assets sold off from a team that is close to contention

[MADSTORK]

Here is your Roster and Minor League prospect problem. #1. Your 40 man Roster payroll flexibility has been strangled by the terrible signings of Sandoval Ramirez and DPrice. You could argue Porcello's contract as well. #2. What Prospects left in the system get a conversation started unless your going to put a player like Betts on the table?

 

Perfect example is Verlander. Arguably the final piece for Boston to possibly win a Championship and or beat Cleveland plus Sale. No dice, Why? cus you burned yourself with past deals that have you paying luxury tax.

 

Same with trying to obtain Stanton at the moment. Your payroll and prospect strapped!

Edited September 2, 2017 by MADSTORK

[Bellhorn04]

Here is your Roster and Minor League prospect problem. #1. Your 40 man Roster payroll flexibility has been strangled by the terrible signings of Sandoval Ramirez and DPrice. You could argue Porcello's contract as well. #2. What Prospects left in the system get a conversation started unless your going to put a player like Betts on the table?

 

Perfect example is Verlander. Arguably the final piece for Boston to possibly win a Championship and or beat Cleveland plus Sale. No dice, Why? cus you burned yourself with past deals that have you paying luxury tax.

 

You're right about the bad deals - but Verlander could turn out to be more of the same. There's a chance you get burned with any big salary you take on. It always seems like a good idea at the time.

[oldtimer]

Here is your Roster and Minor League prospect problem. #1. Your 40 man Roster payroll flexibility has been strangled by the terrible signings of Sandoval Ramirez and DPrice. You could argue Porcello's contract as well. #2. What Prospects left in the system get a conversation started unless your going to put a player like Betts on the table?

 

Perfect example is Verlander. Arguably the final piece for Boston to possibly win a Championship and or beat Cleveland plus Sale. No dice, Why? cus you burned yourself with past deals that have you paying luxury tax.

 

Same with trying to obtain Stanton at the moment. Your payroll and prospect strapped!

 

We are better off keeping our young talent and avoiding the mistakes of the past in putting so much into one player in a long term contract. No argument that the guy is good, its that we need some balance on the team and by signing him the balance that we are working towards is lost again. I'm not against looking at trading players that don't fit our long term plans but would rather look at good quality younger players we can get without breaking the bank.

[Kimmi]

Frankly, I don't get people's willingness to part with Beni (plus others and lots of money) to get Stanton. Yes, Stanton is currently the better player, but Beni is a darn good player in his own right, not to mention that he is younger and cost controlled. I think people have been awestruck by Stanton's homeruns this year. And when I say 'people', I mean 'dudes'. Chicks do not dig the long ball.

[Bellhorn04]

Frankly, I don't get people's willingness to part with Beni (plus others and lots of money) to get Stanton. Yes, Stanton is currently the better player, but Beni is a darn good player in his own right, not to mention that he is younger and cost controlled. I think people have been awestruck by Stanton's homeruns this year. And when I say 'people', I mean 'dudes'. Chicks do not dig the long ball.

 

I have to agree. From what I've seen it's mostly dudes who dig them.

[moonslav59]

Just because GS plays OF does not mean the Marlins would insist on an OF'er in return.

 

Would you give up Bogey, ERod, Groome, Lakins and Chavis?

 

We could then sign Cozart and Lynn.

[Spudboy]

I would love to see Stanton play for the Sox but the numbers just don't work.

[cp176]

I could see giving up something built around Benintendi, a couple of good prospects, and some other pieces...but definitely not "whatever they want." If that's not enough to do it, then too bad.

 

Again, I think some people are really overestimating what it should take. He's having an incredible season, but this is not pre-arb Mike Trout we're talking about here.

 

I agree with you here. Stanton should be on our wish list. I would do a package built around Beni for this 27 year old star yesterday but I just don't see it working out from a $ standpoint or a player package standpoint. I also agree with you with respect to your "non" Mike Trout comparison.

[moonslav59]

I agree with you here. Stanton should be on our wish list. I would do a package built around Beni for this 27 year old star yesterday but I just don't see it working out from a $ standpoint or a player package standpoint. I also agree with you with respect to your "non" Mike Trout comparison.

 

The luxury tax hit is "only" $25M a year. That's doable.

 

What would hurt is the combination of budget space used up going forward PLUS the loss of fine young talent.

 

I agree that we "don't match up" but not because of the "numbers". It's because Miami will want our long term prospects not the players that we can't all re-sign anyways. If they would take Bogey instead of Beni, we could probably keep Betts and Sale.

 

I doubt this is enough:

 

Bogey

ERod

Groome

Chavis

Travis or Lakins (probably Beeks or better)

[Jack Flap]

Yeah, I'm not saying I want to or necessarily would give up Benintendi either, to be clear...I just think if we did trade for Stanton he'd be a pretty logical inclusion.

 

As it is, the kid's on the verge of 20 HR, 20 SB, and .800 OPS in his first full season, and that's with a couple of pretty dire slumps along the way. I think he's going to get better, and I hope we keep him.

[oldtimer]

The luxury tax hit is "only" $25M a year. That's doable.

 

What would hurt is the combination of budget space used up going forward PLUS the loss of fine young talent.

 

I agree that we "don't match up" but not because of the "numbers". It's because Miami will want our long term prospects not the players that we can't all re-sign anyways. If they would take Bogey instead of Beni, we could probably keep Betts and Sale.

 

I doubt this is enough:

 

Bogey

ERod

Groome

Chavis

Travis or Lakins (probably Beeks or better)

Thats a big package. E-Rod has a lot of talent. Get him to stop nibbling and speed up on the mound and we could have a solid 3rd or 4th starter. Groome is our major pitching hope coming from the minors. Chavis may well be our next solid hitter while even Travis would come along. We still would be swapping for one player who could well get injured and be a drain on our budget for many years to come. I prefer we just pass on Stanton and try to build a more balanced team.

[Jack Flap]

It's just striking to me that people are proposing much larger packages than we had to give up for Sale, who was every bit the superstar at his position but on a contract that's an extreme bargain rather than market rate. I guess the only explanation is Kimmi's "dudes dig the long ball" theory.

 

The great thing about the Sale trade is that we didn't fill one hole in the roster by tearing open others, which is exactly what trading a Bogaerts or Rodriguez would do.

 

(And for what it's worth, while Stanton's contract is far from unreasonable, I believe there were reports last month that none of the teams who contacted the Marlins were willing to take on the full amount. I absolutely believe the sheer amount of money involved will keep them from getting the kind of fantastical return they may want.)

Edited September 3, 2017 by Jack Flap

[Nick]

It's just striking to me that people are proposing much larger packages than we had to give up for Sale, who was every bit the superstar at his position but on a contract that's an extreme bargain rather than market rate. I guess the only explanation is Kimmi's "dudes dig the long ball" theory.

 

The great thing about the Sale trade is that we didn't fill one hole in the roster by tearing open others, which is exactly what trading a Bogaerts or Rodriguez would do.

 

(And for what it's worth, while Stanton's contract is far from unreasonable, I believe there were reports last month that none of the teams who contacted the Marlins were willing to take on the full amount. I absolutely believe the sheer amount of money involved will keep them from getting the kind of fantastical return they may want.)

 

Sucks to be Marlin. Team simply does not have resources to carry one contract eating up 20% of total payroll of $100M. Price takes up 16% of Sox payroll but we are still left with $160M vs $75M for Marlins.

Edited September 3, 2017 by Nick

[S5Dewey]

Sucks to be Marlin. Team simply does not have resources to carry one contract eating up 20% of total payroll.

 

I sometimes wonder how good the Marlins (and many other teams) are reeling in their potential resources. One of these evenings I'm going to take a pad of paper and a pencil and keep track of how many ads and promos there are in a game, Each one of those sponsors pays heavily (I would think) to be known as "The _______ of the Boston Red Sox", or "This _____________ is brought to you by [_________________]".

[bowman]

I for one wouldn't have a problem trading for Stanton. I would center it around Bogey. I really don't know how good he will become. This year he doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling. Were going to have to give up something so it comes down to will Stanton make that much of an impact. I think he will and down the road if he ends up as DH, with that power if he stays healthy the numbers he will put up could be scary. ERod is another one. When is he going to take it to the next level. They can both be replaced. Outside of Chris Sale, I would make any other player the center piece to get him. Just my opinion..

[Kimmi]

It's just striking to me that people are proposing much larger packages than we had to give up for Sale, who was every bit the superstar at his position but on a contract that's an extreme bargain rather than market rate. I guess the only explanation is Kimmi's "dudes dig the long ball" theory.

 

The great thing about the Sale trade is that we didn't fill one hole in the roster by tearing open others, which is exactly what trading a Bogaerts or Rodriguez would do.

 

(And for what it's worth, while Stanton's contract is far from unreasonable, I believe there were reports last month that none of the teams who contacted the Marlins were willing to take on the full amount. I absolutely believe the sheer amount of money involved will keep them from getting the kind of fantastical return they may want.)

 

That's a very good point about not creating a hole to fill another hole. I personally wouldn't trade for Stanton based on the contract alone. Having to give up all those prospects and creating holes in other areas on top of that is way over the top IMO.

 

Stanton was put on waivers and no team put a claim on him. If I'm not mistaken, had a team put a claim on him, the Marlins could have flat out given Stanton to that team, and the claiming team would not be able to refuse. The claiming team has to take the player along with the remaining salary. The fact that no team was willing to take that risk tells me that no team wants to take on that salary.

[Bellhorn04]

Stanton was put on waivers and no team put a claim on him. If I'm not mistaken, had a team put a claim on him, the Marlins could have flat out given Stanton to that team, and the claiming team would not be able to refuse. The claiming team has to take the player along with the remaining salary. The fact that no team was willing to take that risk tells me that no team wants to take on that salary.

 

It's actually a little surprising that none of the super-rich teams would be willing to take on Stanton's salary if they didn't have to give up prospects as well. At this point in time he might almost be a bargain compared to, say, David Price's contract, or the projected contracts for Harper and Machado.

[moonslav59]

That's a very good point about not creating a hole to fill another hole. I personally wouldn't trade for Stanton based on the contract alone. Having to give up all those prospects and creating holes in other areas on top of that is way over the top IMO.

 

Stanton was put on waivers and no team put a claim on him. If I'm not mistaken, had a team put a claim on him, the Marlins could have flat out given Stanton to that team, and the claiming team would not be able to refuse. The claiming team has to take the player along with the remaining salary. The fact that no team was willing to take that risk tells me that no team wants to take on that salary.

 

Teams knew Miami would not hand him away for nothing. That's why some did not claim him.

 

Stanton is NOT a salary dump: he just happens to play on a team that can't afford him.

 

His contract is much higher than his luxury tax number. That is something that appeals to only the teams in danger of paying those taxes going forward- the Sox included. He's owed $295M/10, but the luxury tax number is $25M. As much as I hate large and long contracts like this, especially for a player with an injury history, I'd sign this 28 year old to that contract this winter. It's a close call.

 

The thing that tips the balance to no for me, is the loss of young talent. That's why I mentioned the idea of trading one of the players we are not likely to keep down the road- Betts, JBJ or Bogey. I would not trade Betts or JBJ, so if Miami would listen to an offer centered around Bogey, I might try. The offer I suggested with Bogey is steep. It was an offer I think Miami would insist on, not one I would readily make.

 

Kimmi makes some great points. I'll add that trading for Stanton would certainly affect our ability to keep one or two from this list: Pom, Kimbrel, Sale, Bogey, Betts and JBJ, so not only would we lose top young talent, we'd lose some top vets later on..

 

Edited September 3, 2017 by moonslav59

[OH FOY]

Do you think Jeter will be an advisor on moves like this?