2017/18 Hot Stove Thread

[moonslav59]

Would anyone here trade Jackie Bradley Jr., Hanley Ramirez and $5 million to Seattle for reliever Nick Vincent?

 

Bradley remains under team control for three seasons with a projected 2018 arbitration salary of $5.9 million. Ramirez is owed $22 million in 2018 with a 2019 option for $22 million that vests with 497 plate appearances and a passed physical.

 

Vincent remains under team control for two seasons with a projected 2018 arbitration salary of $2.7 million.

 

The Red Sox would save about $20 million off the 2018 budget, freeing up funds to pursue free agents J.D. Martinez and Eric Hosmer.

 

Ramirez would be reunited with Robinson Cano, Nelson Cruz and Jean Segura, his Dominican Republic teammates in the 2017 World Baseball Classic. The Mariners would take the huge risk that Ramirez can play first base.

 

I have no shortage of bad ideas.

 

If we traded for Stanton or signed JD, dumping HRam would help a lot. I think giving up JBJ is too much to offset 3/4ths of HRam's deal. Even without the $5M added, I still would not do it.

[moonslav59]

I don't understand why the Sox don't have more interest in him.

 

Maybe because the view him as a classic AAAA coming off a big year.

[sk7326]

Ah yes. The famous"young players always improve" mantra. Very popular misconception.

 

Also, your starting rotation will likely be gutted this off-season. The Yankees could lose 5 pitchers to free agency next month (Tanaka, Sabbathia, Garcia, Pineda, and Eovaldi). Even losing the injured guys depletes depth...

 

That's because on average it's true

[harmony]

If we traded for Stanton or signed JD, dumping HRam would help a lot. I think giving up JBJ is too much to offset 3/4ths of HRam's deal. Even without the $5M added, I still would not do it.

Dumping Hanley Ramirez, who has significant negative trade value, would require that the Red Sox package a player with surplus value (or that the Red Sox take back an equally bad contract, negating the salary savings).

[Nick]

Who in the hell wants Hanley's contract? Do you honestly think there's an idiot GM out there that will take portion of Hanley's contract and give up something in return? And he just had a surgery. Get real.

[moonslav59]

Dumping Hanley Ramirez, who has significant negative trade value, would require that the Red Sox package a player with surplus value (or that the Red Sox take back an equally bad contract, negating the salary savings).

 

I get that, but 3 years of JBJ is too much, IMO.

 

I'm a huge JBJ fan, so maybe I'm biased.

 

You have any big contracts on your team, we could just flip?

[moonslav59]

Who in the hell wants Hanley's contract? Do you honestly think there's an idiot GM out there that will take portion of Hanley's contract and give up something in return? And he just had a surgery. Get real.

 

Almost any GM with money to spend would take HRam, if we gave them JBJ with him.

 

Only cash-strapped teams would say no.

[harmony]

Who in the hell wants Hanley's contract? Do you honestly think there's an idiot GM out there that will take portion of Hanley's contract and give up something in return? And he just had a surgery. Get real.

No one wants the Hanley Ramirez contract.

 

That's why the Red Sox would need to package Ramirez with a player or players who have surplus value.

 

It's a simple concept.

 

I suspect a team would trade two years of a non-closing reliever for Hanley Ramirez and Mookie Betts.

[moonslav59]

No one wants the Hanley Ramirez contract.

 

That's why the Red Sox would need to package Ramirez with a player or players who have surplus value.

 

It's a simple concept.

 

I suspect a team would trade two years of a non-closing reliever for Hanley Ramirez and Mookie Betts.

 

LOL.

 

I was thinking more like HRam and Groome or Mata plus maybe someone like Holt or Swihart, if they're interested and have roster space.

[harmony]

LOL.

 

I was thinking more like HRam and Groome or Mata plus maybe someone like Holt or Swihart, if they're interested and have roster space.

Good luck with that.

[moonslav59]

Good luck with that.

 

Not for anything of value. That's the break even point.

 

I think some GMs would pay the Sox $22M for Groome.

[Nick]

Not for anything of value. That's the break even point.

 

I think some GMs would pay the Sox $22M for Groome.

 

So basically we're selling Groome for cash? That will make Kimmi happy.

[oldtimer]

I get that, but 3 years of JBJ is too much, IMO.

 

I'm a huge JBJ fan, so maybe I'm biased.

 

You have any big contracts on your team, we could just flip?

 

You are a huge JBJ fan and are likely to be disappointed when he is traded. I think he is the most likely of the young players to be moved. He still has some value but probably can be replaced by equal or better.

[Spudboy]

Not thread worthy but JBJ just got snubbed in the Gold Glove nomination process or whatever it is called.

 

Pillar, Cain, and the guy in Minnesota Thruxton or whatever are the finalists.

 

What a f***ing joke the GG is now.

[harmony]

I get that, but 3 years of JBJ is too much, IMO.

 

I'm a huge JBJ fan, so maybe I'm biased.

 

You have any big contracts on your team, we could just flip?

The Mariners have no big contract on a player who has posted 0.6 fWAR over the past three seasons (including two years of negative fWAR).

 

The big Seattle contracts are Robinson Cano’s (six years and $144 million) and Felix Hernandez’s (two years and $53 million). Only the latter is under water.

 

I seriously doubt the Mariners would trade Cano straight up for the five years and $157 million remaining on the David Price contract.

Edited October 26, 2017 by harmony

[moonslav59]

You are a huge JBJ fan and are likely to be disappointed when he is traded. I think he is the most likely of the young players to be moved. He still has some value but probably can be replaced by equal or better.

 

I agree that he is the most likely B to be traded, if one is traded, but I may not be disappointed. I'm fine with trading anyone for the "right return".

 

If Stanton is the guy coming back, I'll be happy. (I'd rather trade Bogey and a better prospect than JBJ, but I'd love to see GS for the window and maybe beyond.

[moonslav59]

The Mariners have no big contract on a player who has posted 0.6 fWAR over the past three seasons (including two years of negative fWAR).

 

The big Seattle contracts are Robinson Cano’s (six years and $144 million) and Felix Hernandez’s (two years and $53 million). Only the latter is under water.

 

I seriously doubt the Mariners would trade Cano straight up for the five years and $157 million remaining on the David Price contract.

 

Although the Cards are paying $4-6M a year on Leake's contract, the Mariner's still will owe about what Castillo makes. Of course, Leake has had some good WAR years recently, but it is a pretty big contract worth mentioning.

[harmony]

Although the Cards are paying $4-6M a year on Leake's contract, the Mariner's still will owe about what Castillo makes. Of course, Leake has had some good WAR years recently, but it is a pretty big contract worth mentioning.

Seattle has three years and about $38 million in remaining obligations to nearly 30-year-old righthander Mike Leake, who this year posted 3.1 fWAR, valued at $24.6 million, including 1.3 fWAR, valued at $10.1 million, in only five starts for the Mariners:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=10130&position=P

 

That's a modest contract for a solid mid-rotation starter.

 

Seattle third baseman Kyle Seager is entrenched with four years and $73.5 million (plus bonuses) remaining on his contract after posting 24.9 fWAR, valued at $197.2 million, over the last six seasons.

 

Seattle designated hitter Nelson Cruz has one year and $14 million remaining on his contract after posting 12.8 fWAR, valued at $102.4 million, in his first three years with the Mariners.

Edited October 27, 2017 by harmony

[Larry Cook]

Any chance billy would part with Davis this offseason?

 

Maybe he could give us a Yankee size discount on a trade!

[notin]

Not thread worthy but JBJ just got snubbed in the Gold Glove nomination process or whatever it is called.

 

Pillar, Cain, and the guy in Minnesota Thruxton or whatever are the finalists.

 

What a f***ing joke the GG is now.

 

 

Buxton, you mean.

 

Actually those are pretty good candidates if you're not nominating JBJ. Kiermaier is another but he missed a lot of time this year. It's not like they put Aaron Judge up instead of Bradley.

 

The GG was a bigger joke when guys like Mike Schmidt won it every year for lackluster defensive play but lots and lots of home runs...

[notin]

Any chance billy would part with Davis this offseason?

 

Maybe he could give us a Yankee size discount on a trade!

 

No chance. Especially if you want a discount.

[jacksonianmarch]

I think gold gloves should go to each position. Having 3 OF gold gloves effectively removes a corner outfielder from the mix. You should have one for LF, one for CF, and another for RF. Betts would be a perennial winner in RF

[Bellhorn04]

I think gold gloves should go to each position. Having 3 OF gold gloves effectively removes a corner outfielder from the mix. You should have one for LF, one for CF, and another for RF. Betts would be a perennial winner in RF

 

Unfortunately gold glove has become a joke. Sox fans got another reminder of that with Moreland. Dude won a GG in 2016 in spite of having nothing bot negative defensive metrics.

[notin]

I think gold gloves should go to each position. Having 3 OF gold gloves effectively removes a corner outfielder from the mix. You should have one for LF, one for CF, and another for RF. Betts would be a perennial winner in RF

 

That's long been a big problem. Might as well give 4 infielders Gold Gloves and let them all go to shortstops.

[notin]

Unfortunately gold glove has become a joke. Sox fans got another reminder of that with Moreland. Dude won a GG in 2016 in spite of having nothing bot negative defensive metrics.

 

Like I said before, it used to be a bigger joke.

 

A lot of times it just went to the best offensive player. Defensive metrics are good and have probably had a positive impact on the GG,but the metrics themselves are not perfect.

 

If you believe disagreeing with defensive metrics makes the Gold Glove a joke, what about other awards where voting and sabermetrics don't align? Is MVP a joke because it doesn't always go to the highest fWAR in the league?

[jacksonianmarch]

The gold glove is meant for the best defensive player at a position. Most Valuable Player takes on a different meaning. The best player may not be the most valuable. Altuve has the highest WAR in the AL, but without him, do the Astros win the AL West (remember, this is a regular season award). They probably do. Aaron Judge has a decidedly lower WAR, but without him, do the Yankees win the 1st wild card? Probably not. I guarantee it will be closer than people think as Judge’s performance elevated NY into a playoff team whereas Altuve took a playoff caliber team and turned them into a 100 win team

[Bellhorn04]

Like I said before, it used to be a bigger joke.

 

A lot of times it just went to the best offensive player. Defensive metrics are good and have probably had a positive impact on the GG,but the metrics themselves are not perfect.

 

If you believe disagreeing with defensive metrics makes the Gold Glove a joke, what about other awards where voting and sabermetrics don't align? Is MVP a joke because it doesn't always go to the highest fWAR in the league?

 

None of these awards mean a thing to me. Nor do any other of the other awards in the worlds of sports, the arts, whatever.

[moonslav59]

The gold glove is meant for the best defensive player at a position. Most Valuable Player takes on a different meaning. The best player may not be the most valuable. Altuve has the highest WAR in the AL, but without him, do the Astros win the AL West (remember, this is a regular season award). They probably do. Aaron Judge has a decidedly lower WAR, but without him, do the Yankees win the 1st wild card? Probably not. I guarantee it will be closer than people think as Judge’s performance elevated NY into a playoff team whereas Altuve took a playoff caliber team and turned them into a 100 win team

 

Why should how weak the AL West is or how close the wild card race was matter for who wins the MVP?

 

If the Yanks won the WC by 10 games and the Astros won the AL West by 2 games, then Altuve wins the MVP?

 

Not in my world.

 

Why should having other good players on your team matter as well. I get the "valuable" vs "best" argument, but I feel a player should not be penalized for having other good players on his team. It should be an award for the best player- hitter or pitcher.

 

Most of these awards are jokes. There's no set standards on any of them. For these reasons, they mean close to nothing to me.

Edited October 28, 2017 by moonslav59

[jacksonianmarch]

I’m just telling you how some voters have supported their votes

[moonslav59]

I’m just telling you how some voters have supported their votes

 

Fair enough, but the whole system is a joke.