2018 ATL Offseason Thread - Trout 12/$430 million

Post #101 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Dec 21, 2017 5:59 pm

Kerb Hohl wrote:I don't know what to think. Clearly Jeter's group is a dick and they maybe shouldn't sold to them...and YES trading away marketable franchise players for nothing is not fun, but...it's going to help the team in the long run.

The issue isn't really that they traded him, it's that they got so little for him. If that was the offer then just sit and keep him for a few months.

trwi7 · Post #102 » by **trwi7** » Thu Dec 21, 2017 6:27 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
Kerb Hohl wrote:I don't know what to think. Clearly Jeter's group is a dick and they maybe shouldn't sold to them...and YES trading away marketable franchise players for nothing is not fun, but...it's going to help the team in the long run.

The issue isn't really that they traded him, it's that they got so little for him. If that was the offer then just sit and keep him for a few months.

That and they didn't get much for Gordon or Ozuna either. Everything was pretty much just get the salary off the books.

Kerb Hohl · Post #103 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:06 pm

trwi7 wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
Kerb Hohl wrote:I don't know what to think. Clearly Jeter's group is a dick and they maybe shouldn't sold to them...and YES trading away marketable franchise players for nothing is not fun, but...it's going to help the team in the long run.

The issue isn't really that they traded him, it's that they got so little for him. If that was the offer then just sit and keep him for a few months.

That and they didn't get much for Gordon or Ozuna either. Everything was pretty much just get the salary off the books.

Disagree pretty strongly. Gordon and Ozuna not so much, but Stanton for sure.

The Yankees took a quarter of a billion dollars off of the Marlins' hands for a guy that potentially is an injury liability and/or defensive liability (yeah, the Yankees can DH him).

The Marlins had minimal leverage:
1. There may be only 10-12 teams that ever would take on a contract like Stanton's.
2. At any time, it's probably more like 5-6. The Tigers or Mets may take on a $250-300 million deal someday, but not right now they wouldn't.
3. So it was down to 4 teams probably. Yankees, Giants, Cards, maybe Dodgers. The Giants and Cards might have offered slightly more (not much, though) in prospects and Stanton turned them down.
4. Now we're down to 2, maybe 1 team. And that team is willing to take on the whole thing.

So now you get to the "wait it out" thing. That is horrendously dangerous. What if Stanton has one of those 50 game hammy injuries? What if he's back to striking out more often this year? Now you're sitting there at this trade deadline or next offseason and marketing a guy with lower stock that still has 9 years on his contract.

I liken this to if the Bucks had dealt RJ and/or Redd at that one trade deadline. Tanking isn't as important in baseball, but it's pretty good. They got an opportunity to get out, and they got out. Clearing up your situation and starting the rebuild is way more important than getting 1 or 2 prospects back, even if those prospects are more highly rated.

This is Stanton's value. The other option was 2-3 prospects and paying the other team a hundred million bucks. At that point, how much are those prospects worth?

Do you honestly think sitting on him til the trade deadline does anything as you suggested? This isn't Jonathan Lucroy and his $10 million contract where teams jumped back in when his stock rose back up. There are zero other teams that at this trade deadline would say, "well, we were out on this in December but I've reconsidered: Yes, yes I would take on $250 million dollars."

Kerb Hohl · Post #104 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:13 pm

As for Gordon and Ozuna, you could argue maybe they wait it out.

Gordon is a speed-based guy that was on a fair contract, but if you want too much longer he gets into the last 2-3 years of that deal and is a speed-based player in his 30s.

Ozuna only produced a season like last year once. He was not a great player before that and will cost about $25-30 million for 2 years, so the contract isn't insignificant. And Alcantara isn't "nothing" but maybe more could've been had, just not a lock.

Post #105 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Dec 21, 2017 8:32 pm

Yea, Stanton's an injury risk (I guess?) but if Stanton was a FA this winter someone would give him a quarter of a billion dollars. Him being locked up for whoever got him was a feature, not a bug.

Kerb Hohl · Post #106 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Thu Dec 21, 2017 8:37 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:Yea, Stanton's an injury risk (I guess?) but if Stanton was a FA this winter someone would give him a quarter of a billion dollars. Him being locked up for whoever got him was a feature, not a bug.

No doubt he'd get close to that. But what is there to entice a team to give up any more value than they did for him in that trade? Factor in the Marlins had to assess the risk of keeping him and getting stuck with it, plus his no-trade clause, plus only about 2 teams that could afford Stanton that Stanton would approve the trade to. I think that ended up being about the best the Marlins could get.

I don't think Stanton's stock could get any higher than it was and they accepted deals from 2 other teams (Stanton declined) before Jeter turned to the Yankees. Stanton is smack dab in his prime, coming off a career year, and healthy. I doubt his stock can get any higher.

They got the hard part out of the way. Now they need to tank and draft well and sell off any other key pieces at the deadline when their stock is high.

I'll agree that a richer ownership group could've dug their feet in a bit and held out for more on the other guys, but it's entirely possible a rich owner holds on to Stanton and the team sucks for the next 3-4 years and they're stuck rebuilding with 6, years, $200 million left.

Kerb Hohl · Post #107 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Thu Dec 21, 2017 9:36 pm

Nevermind.

Post #108 » by **humanrefutation** » Thu Dec 21, 2017 9:52 pm

Putting aside whether it was a good return for Stanton, the problem that DLB and his fellow South Florida contingent has with the MLB is that they sanctioned a sale to an ownership group that had to take on an enormous amount of debt to be able to afford the sale, knowing that the group would sell-off key assets in order to finance that debt, only a handful of years after they essentially conned Miami out of hundreds of millions of dollars for a stadium with the promise that it would enable them to avoid more firesales. It's a slap in the face to the people of Miami. The MLB chose to accept the highest bid - even if it required a fan-killing tear down to finance it - instead of accepting a bid from an ownership group that could actually afford it.

You can't keep sticking your middle finger up to the fanbase and not expect them to blow up at you. Manfred walked into a lions den and try to lie and parse his way around the topic instead of addressing it honestly and forthrightly.

Kerb Hohl · Post #109 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:05 pm

humanrefutation wrote:Putting aside whether it was a good return for Stanton, the problem that DLB and his fellow South Florida contingent has with the MLB is that they sanctioned a sale to an ownership group that had to take on an enormous amount of debt to be able to afford the sale, knowing that the group would sell-off key assets in order to finance that debt, only a handful of years after they essentially conned Miami out of hundreds of millions of dollars for a stadium with the promise that it would enable them to avoid more firesales. It's a slap in the face to the people of Miami. The MLB chose to accept the highest bid - even if it required a fan-killing tear down to finance it - instead of accepting a bid from an ownership group that could actually afford it.

You can't keep sticking your middle finger up to the fanbase and not expect them to blow up at you. Manfred walked into a lions den and try to lie and parse his way around the topic instead of addressing it honestly and forthrightly.

Don't disagree with really any of that. Just was saying that from a baseball standpoint, it may be better for them. But I get all of that.

MVP2110 · Post #110 » by **MVP2110** » Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:09 pm

I mean could Miami really afford the payroll they were at? I honestly don't know, but with how little fans attend and don't they have a pretty bad TV deal? The mistake was probably signing Stanton to that deal in the first place.

Kerb Hohl · Post #111 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Fri Dec 22, 2017 4:59 am

MVP2110 wrote:I mean could Miami really afford the payroll they were at? I honestly don't know, but with how little fans attend and don't they have a pretty bad TV deal? The mistake was probably signing Stanton to that deal in the first place.

Yeah, exactly. They were up to $135 million projected this year and they had minimal pitching. Maybe the old ownership could’ve sustained that but if they wanted to have a chance to win, they’d have had to have gone higher, potentially.

The Jose Fernandez death had such a butterfly effect.

crkone · Post #112 » by **crkone** » Tue Dec 26, 2017 9:03 pm

Hughes gets a good deal (for him) from the Reds

Read on Twitter

MVP2110 · Post #113 » by **MVP2110** » Wed Dec 27, 2017 5:13 pm

It's not a bad deal. Pretty much what we didn't want to pay Hughes just with another year added on. I'm fine with letting him walk though.

Kerb Hohl · Post #114 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:00 pm

Wade Davis to the Rox. 3 years, $52 million (highest per year for a reliever ever).

mlloyd10 · Post #115 » by **mlloyd10** » Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:09 pm

Kerb Hohl wrote:Wade Davis to the Rox. 3 years, $52 million (highest per year for a reliever ever).

Dumb, Dumb, Dumb, Dumb, Dumb

Kerb Hohl · Post #116 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:11 pm

mlloyd10 wrote:
Kerb Hohl wrote:Wade Davis to the Rox. 3 years, $52 million (highest per year for a reliever ever).

Dumb, Dumb, Dumb, Dumb, Dumb

They have plenty of money to spend over the next several years if their payroll is truly around $130 million. We can raise a banner celebrating that Wade Davis was overpaid by ~$5 million/year as these next few years go by.

mlloyd10 · Post #117 » by **mlloyd10** » Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:13 pm

Kerb Hohl wrote:
mlloyd10 wrote:
Kerb Hohl wrote:Wade Davis to the Rox. 3 years, $52 million (highest per year for a reliever ever).

Dumb, Dumb, Dumb, Dumb, Dumb

They have plenty of money to spend over the next several years if their payroll is truly around $130 million. We can raise a banner celebrating that Wade Davis was overpaid by ~$5 million/year as these next few years go by.

Just becuae you have plenty of money, doesn't mean you spend it. They have given out over 100 mil to relief this off-season

Kerb Hohl · Post #118 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:15 pm

mlloyd10 wrote:
Kerb Hohl wrote:
mlloyd10 wrote:
Dumb, Dumb, Dumb, Dumb, Dumb

They have plenty of money to spend over the next several years if their payroll is truly around $130 million. We can raise a banner celebrating that Wade Davis was overpaid by ~$5 million/year as these next few years go by.

Just becuae you have plenty of money, doesn't mean you spend it. They have given out over 100 mil to relief this off-season

OK, so what is your suggestion? They don't need and probably don't want Arrieta, Lynn, Cobb, etc.

Blackmon is around 1 more year. Arenado 2. All of their financial commitments are very short. If this whole thing doesn't work out, they literally can put together a brand new roster or rebuild in 2019 or 2020.

Just buy another private jet for the owners while Arenado and Blackmon finish out their primes?

mlloyd10 · Post #119 » by **mlloyd10** » Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:25 pm

Im saying that much money for a relief pitcher is dumb

Kerb Hohl · Post #120 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:29 pm

mlloyd10 wrote:Im saying that much money for a relief pitcher is dumb

It's a short contract, though. They have ~$70 million committed next year and their payroll is $130 million this year with Blackmon as they only key player leaving (I would not pay Lemahieu because he sucks) so they'd have plenty to spend.

The year after that Arenado is a free agent.

They have Rodgers, McMahon, Story, Tapia, Dahl all as viable starters making the minimum for several years. They have Hoffman, Freeland, probably Pint, Gray, Bettis, Anderson, Marquez, Senzatela all making around the minimum for several years.

So you've got nothing tied up in the expensive positions. Why not?