ESPN Stark - Brett Lawrie bound for greatness

[UN-Owen]

Trading Bautista b/c Lawrie had a good month or two last year + a good spring training is ridiculous.

We're on the cusp of being a team that is a perennial playoff contender. If we move Bautista, we move back a few years. Besides, if Lawrie meets expectations we're looking at a great 3-4 spot in the lineup for a couple of years before Bautista really declines. You don't trade your great players b/c another one is on the come up. You add to what you already have. And we have potentially two great hitters that should be terrifying for pitchers this season.

Besides, Bautista showed HUGE loyalty in re-signing with Toronto for less, and is a great leader in the locker room. You don't get rid of that kind of player. The value he brings alone is irreplaceable for the price we have him at, and trading a guy like him has ripples across the league, potentially affecting the free agents we can attract.

tl;dr - perennial rebuilding is the reason why no team since the 92/93 Blue Jays have won or done anything worthy of praise.

Players are like stock.

Good analogy. Problem is that Rogers is getting it's dividend from Bautista as he's the one helping sell tickets. They trade Bautista, a lot of money goes with him.

From a pure baseball prospective, it might be the right move. Not sure about business though.

You don't expect Lawrie to surpass Bautista in popularity?

[UN-Owen]

As much as I love Jose, I would call up Miami and see if they would do Bautista and Kelly Johnson for Mike Stanton and Hanley Ramirez.

I don't think the Marlins would pull the trigger, though that trade reminds me of the Alomar deal

I wonder what a trade with the Angels would look like centered around Trout

[vaff87]

Trading arguably the best player in baseball, when he has a good contract, and you already have a lot of talent around hm, makes very little sense.

[Kurtz]

Trading arguably the best player in baseball, when he has a good contract, and you already have a lot of talent around hm, makes very little sense.

Agreed.

If we were 2 years earlier in our rebuild or if Bautista was 2 years older...sure, it'd be a legitimate strategy. Halladay's a good example.

But we're at the stage where we're on the cusp of competing with the big boys, and Bautista should still have a good 3 prime years in him. Makes no sense of trading him now. Now we should be looking at quite the opposite - opening up our wallets or packaging some of our prospects for that stud pitcher or 1B to put us on a level playing field with Bos/NYY/TB.

[kavan]

I think Jose has another 4 years left in him before we see a decline. I think what is awesome is even after the 4 years he will still be a solid player he is one those players who could play till 40 very easily look at Visquel. Sure Jose may not hit 50 jacks at 40 but he could still hit 30 plus when you do it o-natural it is more likely your body can maintain consistency than anyone who was juicing.

[flatjacket1]

I think Jose has another 4 years left in him before we see a decline.

I think you are completely out of your mind to think Bautista will be worth at least 33.2 WAR over the next 4 years. If he does that, he makes Cooperstown.

He will likely regress this year and an argument can be made to trade him. I am so back and forth on it that I don't even know, but it is very unlikely he repeats last season and the fact that he ended the season not-so-hot can be worrisome.

It makes some baseball sense to trade him but then again it doesn't. It will also result in a huge decline in team popularity and attendance because we are suddenly too far away from the playoffs to pretend we have a chance, and also people will have to be fired because of it.

We could get a filthy prospect package for him though.

It's a fair argument for either side.

[Lateral Quicks]

Rays will have Jennings and Moore for the entire season

Both could be all-stars this year


Our time is now? Yet we were a .500 team last season

The difference between a .500 team in baseball and a contending team (90 wins) in baseball is 9 wins, or an increase of 11%. They're close enough to contending right now, and they have the prospects to make the necessary upgrades (either through promotion or trades) already. There is no need to trade your best player and one of the best players in the game.

[Parataxis]

Besides, Bautista showed HUGE loyalty in re-signing with Toronto for less, and is a great leader in the locker room. You don't get rid of that kind of player.

Ilove Bautista, but his signing wasn't done out of loyalty - it was done out of a desire for security.

He'd had one great season to that point. Nobody - not AA, not Joey, not me, not you, knew if he'd be able to replicate it. If he didn't sign the contract and had the year he did, he'd be rolling in it this year - but if he had a mediocre year (or worse) he'd be making half what is is now.

We have him on a very team friendly contract - but it wasn't a hometown discount by any means.

[flatjacket1]

Besides, Bautista showed HUGE loyalty in re-signing with Toronto for less, and is a great leader in the locker room. You don't get rid of that kind of player.

Ilove Bautista, but his signing wasn't done out of loyalty - it was done out of a desire for security.

Agreed. It was considered an overpay at the time by the majority of fans and some "experts". Who expected Bautista to have a BETTER year?

[Secueritae]

Personally, I would look to deal Bautista while his value is at its highest, add 2 or 3 stud prospects to the mix, and build this team around Lawrie as the franchise player

Honestly I wouldn't trade away our best player for a couple prospects (Even if studs) unless say a Mike Stanton or Andrew McCutchen was involved. Why trade a commodity that not only:
a) Brings more fans to the ballpark, and increases viewership
b) Offers the team superior offensive and defensive abilities
c) Keeps us relevant in the MLB outside of Toronto.

And what if the prospects you trade for fail and don't reach expectations?
You can't hope Lawrie will surpass Bautista in popularity, you gotta hope he adds to the team's popularity.

[satyr9]

Personally, I would look to deal Bautista while his value is at its highest, add 2 or 3 stud prospects to the mix, and build this team around Lawrie as the franchise player

Honestly I wouldn't trade away our best player for a couple prospects (Even if studs) unless say a Mike Stanton or Andrew McCutchen was involved. Why trade a commodity that not only:
a) Brings more fans to the ballpark, and increases viewership
b) Offers the team superior offensive and defensive abilities
c) Keeps us relevant in the MLB outside of Toronto.

And what if the prospects you trade for fail and don't reach expectations?
You can't hope Lawrie will surpass Bautista in popularity, you gotta hope he adds to the team's popularity.

It is impossible to trade a guy of Bautista's calibre until you're a 100 loss team willing to take 17-18 year-old risks, meaning you're willing to get way less than his present value because his present value is meaningless to you. You absolutely have to get a guy with some experience and insanely high upside, so you're already down to maybe 10 guys to base a trade around.

Sure, there are trades the Jays would accept, Stras and Harper, Heyward and Teheran maybe, or for a young ace like Kershaw, but it'd be hard to come up with 6 teams that have a package you could accept and less than 5min on the phone with each to find out the other team can't or won't pull the trigger on a deal like that.

The point of whether to trade or not is moot. It cannot happen, unless you'll take 50 cents on the dollar and I'll assume no one wants to do that.

I have much higher opinions of the current roster than UN-Owen, but I'd trade Bautista in a heartbeat for full market value (I'd trade any player for that price no matter what position my team was in), I just recognize full market value is an impossible threshold to meet because of his current production and contract.

edit: I realize market value is a stupid term for what I'm trying to describe. Obviously, the market value is what you can get for him, which to me isn't ever going to be what he's worth. So pick the term that means that.

[Hamyltowne]

The difference between a .500 team in baseball and a contending team (90 wins) in baseball is 9 wins, or an increase of 11%. They're close enough to contending right now, and they have the prospects to make the necessary upgrades (either through promotion or trades) already. There is no need to trade your best player and one of the best players in the game.

This.

[Hamyltowne]

For those still not convinced, remember the Roy Halladay deal.

We got a great young catcher who is, unfortunately, stuck in the minors until we figure out what to do with JPA. It's a waste of time, as Arencibia is poor defensively and has a flat-footed swing.

And Kyle Drabek, who is nowhere near ready to pitch in The Show.

And Michael Taylor, who was traded for Wallace, who was then traded for Gose.

All that for the best pitcher in the game. Bautista would not bring home better bacon.

(That said, I'd be interested in Mike Stanton, although not necessarily for Bautista. Stanton will hit 40 home runs for the next ten years.)

[BigLeagueChew]

For those still not convinced, remember the Roy Halladay deal.

We got a great young catcher who is, unfortunately, stuck in the minors until we figure out what to do with our JPA. It's a waste of time, as Arencibia is poor defensively and has a flat-footed swing.

And Kyle Drabek, who is nowhere near ready to pitch in the show.

And Michael Taylor, who was traded for Wallace, who was then traded for Gose.

All that for the best pitcher in the game. Bautista would not bring home better bacon.

(That said, I'd be interested in Mike Stanton, though not necessarily for Bautista. Stanton will hit 40 home runs for the net ten years.)

Bautista plays everyday, Halladay does not. There would be tons of teams that would sell the farm for Bautista. Especially with his contract.

D'arnaud isn't stuck in the minors, he's still developing and he will be here by the end of the season. He is most likely our catcher next season.

Drabek is our 6th starter and not as far off as you might think.

Gose trade we will find out about more down the road but we already know Wallace isn't a good 1st baseman.

[flatjacket1]

All that for the best pitcher in the game. Bautista would not bring home better bacon.

This is a completely different situation.

We traded Roy Halladay to the 1 team that he wanted to go to like a matter of months before his contract expired. Not only was he a rental but he was going to sign with Philly the following year regardless of what happened. They didn't need to offer us much at all to get him for a matter of months.

Bautista is around the same age as Halladay was and is under team control for 5 more seasons on a team friendly contract. He will produce surplus value, saving the team he is traded to millions. (E.x. Bautista had about 24M worth of surplus value last season).

The situations are so different its not even funny. 5 years of Bautista (with a team option on the 5th season) or a couple months of Roy Halladay.

Bautista would command a filthy prospect package worth around 100M in surplus value (assuming his play dipped around 15%). To put that in perspective, that is around 25 first round picks (surplus value per pick is around 4M)

[UN-Owen]

For those still not convinced, remember the Roy Halladay deal.

We got a great young catcher who is, unfortunately, stuck in the minors until we figure out what to do with our JPA. It's a waste of time, as Arencibia is poor defensively and has a flat-footed swing.

And Kyle Drabek, who is nowhere near ready to pitch in The Show.

And Michael Taylor, who was traded for Wallace, who was then traded for Gose.

All that for the best pitcher in the game. Bautista would not bring home better bacon.

(That said, I'd be interested in Mike Stanton, though not necessarily for Bautista. Stanton will hit 40 home runs for the net ten years.)

Remember the Clemens deal too

In trading the best pitcher in baseball, both times the Jays failed to land the other team's top prospect

Domonic Brown should've been included in the Halladay deal

And the asking price for Clemens should've been Soriano and Pettitte

[Hamyltowne]

This is a completely different situation.

We traded Roy Halladay to the 1 team that he wanted to go to like a matter of months before his contract expired. Not only was he a rental but he was going to sign with Philly the following year regardless of what happened. They didn't need to offer us much at all to get him for a matter of months.

You're right. Context matters.

Still, a trade involving Bautista is implausible, all the same.

[flatjacket1]

=
Still, a trade involving Bautista is implausible, all the same.

I agree. If Bautista was traded I'd be shocked.

[Hamyltowne]

Remember the Clemens deal too

Homer Bush!

That was horrible.

If memory serves, pitchers are more often dealt for large returns.

And can we just drop this slipshod, sugary reverie that has us trading Bautista for an entire farm-system? It isn't going to happen.