moonslav59

I'm not sure speed was the only factor in his high BAbip, but your point is a good one. That also begs the question: if he had good numbers last year based a lot on his speed, why should we expect/hope his hitting to improve as he moves up a level?

Since 2003, there has been a strong relationship between having a strong farm stretch followed by ring seasons. For the decades beforehand, you are right.

It's still 13-8 on wanting some sort of sell-off at some point before or at the deadline. I thought the vote would be flipped 8-13.

Obviously not highly competitive, unless we max spending every year and never reset. We need a farm to stay highly competitive for longer stretches.

No Eovaldi of Price? I'm not for this, but it was accepted... Betts, Workman, Chavis & Duran for Myers, Lucchesi, Grisham, Patino, Campusano & Marcano

What if we threw some prospects into the deal plus Workman (FA after 2020)? Betts, Eovaldi, Workman, Chavis, Duran for Myers, Grisham, Naylor, Patino, Morejon & Weathers (The simulator accepted this.)

The real question is about Patino.

No. They are not Bloom acquisitions. If this happened, it would be a partial vindication on DD's rep. (Are any of these guys Ben dudes?) I think Duran was over-hyped and helped by an unsustainably high BAbip, last year. I really like Ward & Mata. Casas is the rave, but he's far away. Groome has to prove himself, soon. Dalbec has immediate hopes. I like him more than Chavis, but there are things he needs to work on. Jimenez is kind of unknown but has serious upside. I've said it before. I think DD did better than I expected with the picks and restrictions we had on us over his term, but I expected us to be 28th to 30th ranked, so doing slightly better than that is not what we needed. I don't blame DD for his picks, but his trades really hurt the farm. (I'm glad we won a ring and made it all worth it, but it's payback time, now.)

Do we have another, better (and ML ready) catcher in the system?

Several posters claimed, during the impending cliff debates, that somehow our farm would be rebuilt quickly and strongly. Even recently, I can't remember who, someone was gushing over our talent evaluators and claiming we'd be a top farm team soon.

Yes, it's $13.833 x 3 years. That's what makes trading for him enticing. The Padres save some money, and we avoid taxes. We also need a 1Bman and 4th OF'er. The rest of the package is the issue.

The Dodgers need to get over the hump and finally win it all. This looks like the year with the best chance as the Sox and Astros have declined. The Padres are not at a "win now" place. They need more than Betts for that.

Ockimey has great splits vs LHPs, despite the high K rate, but it's hard to know if that would carry over to the bigs. Best odds at breaking camp with the big team? Marco Johnson Poyner Houck Ockimey In that order. We'd have to DFA someone or 60 day IL a player to add one (back) to the 40 man.

It seems very strange the Padres would seek a one year star like Betts. I can see why they'd trade Myers for him, but they are acting like Betts is a salary dump like Myers is. Maybe, they think Betts will like SoCal so much, he'll re-sign with them. If they took Eovaldi with Betts, it would balance the money better than just handing us $20-25M. I still think the Dodgers are the best match.

I'd even add Duran and/or Workman to upgrade to Gore or Patino, but since Myers is paid for 3 years, they should take Eovaldi or Price..

I'm with you, Bell.

Eovaldi was paid with the checkbook. Pearce with pocket change.

Catching prospects are the hardest to project. I'd insist they take Price or Eovaldi with Betts and lower the return.

"The main stumbling block in trade talks is how much of Myers’ contract the Red Sox would be covering,*Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune*reports, as the Padres want Boston’s obligation “to be much closer to the full value of the contract.”* The prospects reportedly being discussed in the trade aren’t any of San Diego’s “top five minor leaguers,” which would mean the likes of Gore or Patino aren’t involved." According to the trade simulator, Betts for Myers with SD paying half of his deal would put the values at +50.7 to SD and -25.3 to BOS. Differential 76.0. If we get no top 5 prospects: 121.5 Tatis Jr 82.4 Gore 51.8 Abrams 50.2 Patino 32.1 Trammell That leaves this: ML Level: Paddack 79.1 P Lucchesi 38.3 P Lamet 25.4 P Mejia 22.2 C Pham 20.7 OF Grisham 18.8 OF Naylor 18.5 OF/1B Yates 16.0 Closer (last year) Munoz 9.8 P Cordero 9.6 OF Quantrill 8.8 P Baez 8.0 P Wingenter 7.7 P Strahm 7.5 P Margot 6.6 OF France 5.8 3B Prospects: Campusano 25.1 C Morejon 13.7 P Potts 11.9 3B (1B?) Arias 11.3 SS (2B?) Weathers 11.0 P Rosario 10.8 OF Miller 8.0 3B Marcano 7.2 2B To reach 76, I suppose this package meets the value set by this site: Campusano 25.1 C Morejon 13.7 P Potts 11.9 3B (1B?) Arias 11.3 SS (2B?) Weathers 11.0 P Maybe we get a ML'er or two + 3-4 prospects. I don't see any combo that works for me. (Plus, we pay Myers for 3 years. Betts is done after 2020.)

This is absurd. Betts for Myers and no good prospects wouldn't be a good deal, even if SD paid all Myers's contract!

Then, Patino, Campusano plus....

I can't see it, either.

Here's one the trade simulator accepted: Betts & Eovaldi for Myers, Margot, Patino & Campusano If there is no Price or Eovaldi attached, maybe adding JBJ might work, although OF is not a SD need once they get Betts. Betts & JBJ (+$4M) for Myers, Margot, Gore & Campusano or Betts for Myers, Gore, Campusano & Rosario (Not saying I like these deals.)

Too late to go "all in" for 2020. Even if we signed the best 3 or 4 remaining FAs, we'll still look worse on paper than 2019.

It's got to include Price or Eovaldi. I've suggested such trades on the trade simulator- like this one: Betts & Price for Myers, Margot, Quantrill, Campusano & Morejon