ImageImageImageImageImage

MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline

Moderator: JaysRule15

User avatar
Schad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 57,353
And1: 17,051
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#181 » by Schad » Tue Aug 1, 2017 5:31 pm

Skin Blues wrote:I'm pretty sure we could have gotten a huge haul for Smoak. He legitimately looks like a superstar and he is owed at most $12M for the next 2+ seasons. These aren't fluky results like an extraordinary BABIP or HR/FB%; even if those two drop to his career marks, the drop in SwStr% and K% are what is driving his success. He's made concrete changes in his approach and the results are obvious.


Yeah. It's rare that a player improves in the way Smoak has, and the narrative around it is so simple. Stop swinging so damned much at bad pitches, and tweak your stance and swing to allow the ball to travel a little more so you know which ones are bad pitches. Baseball is easy sometimes!

As for 1B, we could easily play Morales there, cycle players through DH to give our olds days off in the field, and get by. It also wouldn't really matter because we'd be a garbage fire in 2018.
Image
**** your asterisk.
So_Fresh
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,992
And1: 3,450
Joined: Jan 29, 2013
       

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#182 » by So_Fresh » Tue Aug 1, 2017 6:00 pm

Pillar needs to look at Smoak as an example. He needs to stop swinging at so many bad pitches. After that "gay" comment Pillar hasn't been the same. I would entertain offers for him in the off-season. Tired of his poor play.
polo007
General Manager
Posts: 8,546
And1: 2,652
Joined: Nov 02, 2006

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#183 » by polo007 » Tue Aug 1, 2017 6:07 pm

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

"I gave them a D+," Olney said. "It was the fourth-lowest grade out of the 30 teams in baseball."

However, Olney said he believes it was the play of the players in the end that made things difficult on management and cost them on Monday. Pending free agents Marco Estrada, Francisco Liriano and Jose Bautista have all had poor campaigns this season, so their trade value dropped significantly from where it previously sat. 

"I don't really blame the front office for this, I think they were incredibly unlucky as we talked about it last week with so many of their pending free agents having miserable seasons which cut into their trade value," he explained. "But you can't get around the fact that you're not going to get much return when a Liriano is having a bad year, when an Estrada is having a bad year, when a Jose Bautista is having a bad year.

"That was absolutely devastating for them and let's face it, you get (Nori) Aoki with team control, helps you in the outfield but it's not that much of an upgrade and didn't change trajectory into 2018. That would have been your biggest goal heading into the trade deadline." 

Monday's deadline may have also been the best time to shop the likes of third baseman Josh Donaldson if the Jays were considering a full rebuild, but without a deal Donaldson's marketability may have taken a nose dive.

While talking with other teams, Olney says the impression they got was that Jays ownership did not want to go through a whole rebuilding cycle and potentially upset their fan base. In the long run, though, upsetting the fans now may have paid off in the future.

"I heard [Donaldson] talked about with other organizations, but the perception that they had was that Toronto's front office and ownership is very cognizant that they fill their ballpark every day and they weren't ready to go through a rebuilding cycle and talk about guys like Josh Donaldson and like Marcus Stroman," said Olney. "Baseball wise, that may have been the best way to go."

Olney, however, believes the Blue Jays might not be done with making moves. Marco Estrada could still be dealt before the waiver deadline at the end of August, with many teams including the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees looking for pitching depth. 

"A team like the Red Sox, who started Doug Fister last night but he's been up and down, they would be a perfect potential landing spot [for Estrada]," he explained. "The Yankees, depending on how some of their young pitchers respond to the increasing number of innings, they could be a team that could make a waiver claim. All the teams that are chasing the Astros are going to have a shot at him before Houston does."
Tanner
Veteran
Posts: 2,829
And1: 4,173
Joined: Jul 04, 2016

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#184 » by Tanner » Tue Aug 1, 2017 6:12 pm

I think Smoak is for real too, or at least has reached a level well above what he used to be, but if he's doing this same type of performance next season, then I would think his value would increase with the 2019 option involved as he would have proven himself for more than a season, or in this case a few months.

With Pillar, how many teams pay for defence? Even at his peak in 2015, I'm not sure he had a ton of value in the trade market even though he was a 4 war player. Defence is highly unpredictable year to year for most players, and Pillar is not good with the bat. He could go from 3 win player to replacement level with a snap of a finger. I would still move him once a better Cf option presents itself, but I wouldn't expect a big return.
Tanner
Veteran
Posts: 2,829
And1: 4,173
Joined: Jul 04, 2016

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#185 » by Tanner » Tue Aug 1, 2017 6:31 pm

The_Hater wrote:I don't abide by the theory that you only trade these guys if you can fetch something great. Happ, Smoak and Pillar all would have netted decent prospect return. Every trade isn't Chris Sale for the farm. We were on the wrong end of these types of deals often enough to know that if you throw enough decent-middling prospects into a pile, you're going to find some winners in there


The front office is already building up pretty solid quantity. They basically turned Hutchison into Ramirez, Hernandez, and McGuire. Maybe one out of that group pans out, or maybe none do, or maybe they are used in trades down the line, but those types of prospects can be acquired regardless of team direction. The Jays need more prospects on the Vlad/Bo level, or at least Alford level, to make any sort of mass trade off worth it, otherwise they really don't have to trade everyone and bottom out.

Looking at the Jays own example, as bad as those 2013 trades were, how many of those prospects panned out? Look at every prospect traded for Happ, and the ones traded to Miami, and the ones traded for Dickey, and Donaldson, and Tulo, etc. I did not agree with all of those moves, but really, other than Syndergaard, what the heck did the Jays miss out on? As short sighted as AA was, he pretty much kept the best prospects he had aside from Thor. Rebuilding is not easy, even if you take 30 new shiny prospects and shove it into a system. It's going to take a lot of good scouting and player development, which I think the Jays have now with their new guys in place. I'd rather focus on the elite prospects and get the quantity from trades like Liriano/Smith, than get the quantity by trading actual productive MLB'ers.

The Jays are always going to have to juggle the baseball end with the business end. That's how Rogers operates. It's unavoidable. The difference now is that Shapiro is in charge and not Beeston. They can focus on baseball moves and not "look we have a track team out there" cluelessness from Beeston. I say let the front office try to juggle both and see what happens.
User avatar
Cyrus
Senior Mod - Raptors
Senior Mod - Raptors
Posts: 34,841
And1: 3,447
Joined: Jun 15, 2001
Location: Is taking his talents to South Beach!

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#186 » by Cyrus » Tue Aug 1, 2017 6:32 pm

This is an interesting ranking of all the prospects that were traded at the deadline or roughly around then, where the prospects rank in comparison to one another.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/ranking-the-prospects-traded-during-deadline-season/

#10, #33 and #44 amongst all the prospects that were dealt.
User avatar
Schad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 57,353
And1: 17,051
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#187 » by Schad » Tue Aug 1, 2017 6:49 pm

Tanner wrote:Looking at the Jays own example, as bad as those 2013 trades were, how many of those prospects panned out? Look at every prospect traded for Happ, and the ones traded to Miami, and the ones traded for Dickey, and Donaldson, and Tulo, etc. I did not agree with all of those moves, but really, other than Syndergaard, what the heck did the Jays miss out on? As short sighted as AA was, he pretty much kept the best prospects he had aside from Thor. Rebuilding is not easy, even if you take 30 new shiny prospects and shove it into a system. It's going to take a lot of good scouting and player development, which I think the Jays have now with their new guys in place. I'd rather focus on the elite prospects and get the quantity from trades like Liriano/Smith, than get the quantity by trading actual productive MLB'ers.


We need the quantity because they're cheap, and having a large number of players making peanuts is essential for team-building in the modern era, where free agent WAR values have gotten utterly absurd. If Stroman, Travis, Sanchez, Osuna, Pillar and others weren't pre-arb last year, we don't get within a sniff of the playoffs, because we'd have blown through our budget. Instead of Happ, we'd have had random scrub X as our fifth starter. Having a couple young superstars helps, but you cannot reasonably surround them with veterans and hope to compete, because an average starting position player now costs you $15m AAV.

The Red Sox are going to have the same problem in a couple years, which is why that ought to be the time we're targeting. Sale is a free agent after 2018, and is due for a massive raise (if they can keep him). Pomeranz is a winter 2018 FA, as well. Betts is about to start getting hefty arb raises, JBJ, Bogaerts are already there, and the latter is a winter 2019 FA. By 2020, now that their system has been considerably denuded, it's going to be a mad scramble for them to remain competitive, even with a $200m+ payroll.
Image
**** your asterisk.
The_Hater
GHOAT (Greatest Hater Of All Time)
Posts: 85,319
And1: 40,047
Joined: May 23, 2001
     

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#188 » by The_Hater » Tue Aug 1, 2017 7:22 pm

Tanner wrote:
The_Hater wrote:I don't abide by the theory that you only trade these guys if you can fetch something great. Happ, Smoak and Pillar all would have netted decent prospect return. Every trade isn't Chris Sale for the farm. We were on the wrong end of these types of deals often enough to know that if you throw enough decent-middling prospects into a pile, you're going to find some winners in there


The front office is already building up pretty solid quantity. They basically turned Hutchison into Ramirez, Hernandez, and McGuire. Maybe one out of that group pans out, or maybe none do, or maybe they are used in trades down the line, but those types of prospects can be acquired regardless of team direction. The Jays need more prospects on the Vlad/Bo level, or at least Alford level, to make any sort of mass trade off worth it, otherwise they really don't have to trade everyone and bottom out.

Looking at the Jays own example, as bad as those 2013 trades were, how many of those prospects panned out? Look at every prospect traded for Happ, and the ones traded to Miami, and the ones traded for Dickey, and Donaldson, and Tulo, etc. I did not agree with all of those moves, but really, other than Syndergaard, what the heck did the Jays miss out on? As short sighted as AA was, he pretty much kept the best prospects he had aside from Thor. Rebuilding is not easy, even if you take 30 new shiny prospects and shove it into a system. It's going to take a lot of good scouting and player development, which I think the Jays have now with their new guys in place. I'd rather focus on the elite prospects and get the quantity from trades like Liriano/Smith, than get the quantity by trading actual productive MLB'ers.

The Jays are always going to have to juggle the baseball end with the business end. That's how Rogers operates. It's unavoidable. The difference now is that Shapiro is in charge and not Beeston. They can focus on baseball moves and not "look we have a track team out there" cluelessness from Beeston. I say let the front office try to juggle both and see what happens.


The Jays don't have to juggle the baseball end with the business end, ownership chooses to do that because they're forever shortsighted. That's the main reason the JAys wnt over 20 years between playoff appearances, because they tried to stay relavent instead of taking a longer term view of the franchise. And all this is going to do from a business end is chase the fanbase away once again because if you win 75 games or 60, you still aren't playing meaningful baseball in August and September.

Anyways, I think we have excellent management in place, I just wish ownership would get out of their way and let them build this franchise properly just like Gillick did in the 1980's. It's obvious to me and many others that ownership not managemnet wants us to compete in 2018. Common sense and history tells us this direction is a mistake.
AthensBucks wrote:Lowry is done.
Nurse is below average at best.
Masai is overrated.
I dont get how so many people believe in the raptors,they have zero to chance to win it all.


April 14th, 2019.
User avatar
duppyy
RealGM
Posts: 18,635
And1: 13,102
Joined: Aug 04, 2004
Location: ???????, ??????
       

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#189 » by duppyy » Tue Aug 1, 2017 7:25 pm

I don't know too much about these different trade deadlines but will Rogers be fine with trading/letting go of big names like Donaldson or Bautista if they are planning on increasing ticket prices next year?
User avatar
Skin Blues
Veteran
Posts: 2,624
And1: 871
Joined: Nov 24, 2010

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#190 » by Skin Blues » Tue Aug 1, 2017 7:29 pm

Tanner wrote:Looking at the Jays own example, as bad as those 2013 trades were, how many of those prospects panned out? Look at every prospect traded for Happ, and the ones traded to Miami, and the ones traded for Dickey, and Donaldson, and Tulo, etc. I did not agree with all of those moves, but really, other than Syndergaard, what the heck did the Jays miss out on?

Mets trade: d'Arnaud (4 WAR, 2+ years of team control remaining), Syndergaard (11 WAR, 4+ years of team control remaining)
Marlins trade: DeSclafani (5.2 WAR, 3+ years of team control remaining), Marisnick (3.9 WAR, 3+ years of team control remaining), Alvarez (4.2 WAR)
Tigers trade: Norris (2.6 WAR, 4+ years of team control remaining), Boyd (1.3 WAR, 5+ years of team control remaining)
Rockies trade: Hoffman (1.1 WAR, 5+ years of team control remaining)

That's 8 prospects with a total of 33.3 WAR for players that earned for the most part, the league minimum while accruing all of that value, and most of those guys still have many cheap years remaining, especially the 5 starting pitchers who have a combined total of 21 seasons of team control remaining. On the free agent market that would cost roughly $333M so far, but I imagine it'll surpass $500M of lost value if not much more by the time those guys reach free agency. So to answer your question of "what the heck did the Jays miss out on", the answer is: a lot. It'd be a bigger task to go over all the guys we acquired for the prospects to see how their WAR compared to their salary but I imagine there wasn't much surplus value. The Oakland trade turned out extremely well but that was more just bizarre on behalf of Beane since Donaldson had 4 years of cheap-ish team control left, and wasn't a typical prospects-for-veteran(s) trade. But both prospects we gave up turned out as best as they could have hoped so far.
User avatar
Schad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 57,353
And1: 17,051
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#191 » by Schad » Tue Aug 1, 2017 7:34 pm

Which is an essential thing to remember: if a guy is thought as a prospect to be a frontline starter, and he ends up being a merely-okay #4? He's kinda a bust, yeah. But he's also really quite valuable, because merely-okay #4 starters are really **** expensive, and every time you trade a merely-okay #4 starter and then have to acquire one in trade/free agency, you're shelling out serious money.
Image
**** your asterisk.
User avatar
Lateral Quicks
RealGM
Posts: 20,291
And1: 16,361
Joined: Dec 05, 2002
   

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#192 » by Lateral Quicks » Tue Aug 1, 2017 7:54 pm

Skin Blues wrote:
Tanner wrote:Looking at the Jays own example, as bad as those 2013 trades were, how many of those prospects panned out? Look at every prospect traded for Happ, and the ones traded to Miami, and the ones traded for Dickey, and Donaldson, and Tulo, etc. I did not agree with all of those moves, but really, other than Syndergaard, what the heck did the Jays miss out on?

Mets trade: d'Arnaud (4 WAR, 2+ years of team control remaining), Syndergaard (11 WAR, 4+ years of team control remaining)
Marlins trade: DeSclafani (5.2 WAR, 3+ years of team control remaining), Marisnick (3.9 WAR, 3+ years of team control remaining), Alvarez (4.2 WAR)
Tigers trade: Norris (2.6 WAR, 4+ years of team control remaining), Boyd (1.3 WAR, 5+ years of team control remaining)
Rockies trade: Hoffman (1.1 WAR, 5+ years of team control remaining)

That's 8 prospects with a total of 33.3 WAR for players that earned for the most part, the league minimum while accruing all of that value, and most of those guys still have many cheap years remaining, especially the 5 starting pitchers who have a combined total of 21 seasons of team control remaining. On the free agent market that would cost roughly $333M so far, but I imagine it'll surpass $500M of lost value if not much more by the time those guys reach free agency. So to answer your question of "what the heck did the Jays miss out on", the answer is: a lot. It'd be a bigger task to go over all the guys we acquired for the prospects to see how their WAR compared to their salary but I imagine there wasn't much surplus value. The Oakland trade turned out extremely well but that was more just bizarre on behalf of Beane since Donaldson had 4 years of cheap-ish team control left, and wasn't a typical prospects-for-veteran(s) trade. But both prospects we gave up turned out as best as they could have hoped so far.


Outstanding post.
Nick Nurse recounting his first meeting with Kawhi:
“We could have gone forever. (Raptors management) kept knocking on the door and I was like, ‘A couple more minutes.’ Because we were really into it."
User avatar
Kurtz
RealGM
Posts: 15,015
And1: 15,639
Joined: Aug 07, 2002
Location: Toronto

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#193 » by Kurtz » Tue Aug 1, 2017 11:56 pm

Skin Blues wrote:
Tanner wrote:Looking at the Jays own example, as bad as those 2013 trades were, how many of those prospects panned out? Look at every prospect traded for Happ, and the ones traded to Miami, and the ones traded for Dickey, and Donaldson, and Tulo, etc. I did not agree with all of those moves, but really, other than Syndergaard, what the heck did the Jays miss out on?

Mets trade: d'Arnaud (4 WAR, 2+ years of team control remaining), Syndergaard (11 WAR, 4+ years of team control remaining)
Marlins trade: DeSclafani (5.2 WAR, 3+ years of team control remaining), Marisnick (3.9 WAR, 3+ years of team control remaining), Alvarez (4.2 WAR)
Tigers trade: Norris (2.6 WAR, 4+ years of team control remaining), Boyd (1.3 WAR, 5+ years of team control remaining)
Rockies trade: Hoffman (1.1 WAR, 5+ years of team control remaining)

That's 8 prospects with a total of 33.3 WAR for players that earned for the most part, the league minimum while accruing all of that value, and most of those guys still have many cheap years remaining, especially the 5 starting pitchers who have a combined total of 21 seasons of team control remaining. On the free agent market that would cost roughly $333M so far, but I imagine it'll surpass $500M of lost value if not much more by the time those guys reach free agency. So to answer your question of "what the heck did the Jays miss out on", the answer is: a lot. It'd be a bigger task to go over all the guys we acquired for the prospects to see how their WAR compared to their salary but I imagine there wasn't much surplus value. The Oakland trade turned out extremely well but that was more just bizarre on behalf of Beane since Donaldson had 4 years of cheap-ish team control left, and wasn't a typical prospects-for-veteran(s) trade. But both prospects we gave up turned out as best as they could have hoped so far.


Ok, I understand your reasoning on this one, but I have to disagree with your valuations. (you have to look at your $333 mil number and realize that something is amiss there).

The problem stems from the notion that 1 WAR = $8-10 mil. That's reductive and misleading. An average MLB player has a WAR around 2.0. So when you mention guys like D'Arnaud, Marisnick, Boyd, etc, all of whom are consistently below-average players if not liabilities, yet you assign to them positive value that contributes to that $333 mil figure...it's misleading.

Not that I disagree with your overall point, in particular the impact of Syndergaard/Norris/Hoffman...but the net evaluation is off.
Image
Tanner
Veteran
Posts: 2,829
And1: 4,173
Joined: Jul 04, 2016

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#194 » by Tanner » Wed Aug 2, 2017 12:30 am

Skin Blues wrote:
Tanner wrote:Looking at the Jays own example, as bad as those 2013 trades were, how many of those prospects panned out? Look at every prospect traded for Happ, and the ones traded to Miami, and the ones traded for Dickey, and Donaldson, and Tulo, etc. I did not agree with all of those moves, but really, other than Syndergaard, what the heck did the Jays miss out on?

Mets trade: d'Arnaud (4 WAR, 2+ years of team control remaining), Syndergaard (11 WAR, 4+ years of team control remaining)
Marlins trade: DeSclafani (5.2 WAR, 3+ years of team control remaining), Marisnick (3.9 WAR, 3+ years of team control remaining), Alvarez (4.2 WAR)
Tigers trade: Norris (2.6 WAR, 4+ years of team control remaining), Boyd (1.3 WAR, 5+ years of team control remaining)
Rockies trade: Hoffman (1.1 WAR, 5+ years of team control remaining)

That's 8 prospects with a total of 33.3 WAR for players that earned for the most part, the league minimum while accruing all of that value, and most of those guys still have many cheap years remaining, especially the 5 starting pitchers who have a combined total of 21 seasons of team control remaining. On the free agent market that would cost roughly $333M so far, but I imagine it'll surpass $500M of lost value if not much more by the time those guys reach free agency. So to answer your question of "what the heck did the Jays miss out on", the answer is: a lot. It'd be a bigger task to go over all the guys we acquired for the prospects to see how their WAR compared to their salary but I imagine there wasn't much surplus value. The Oakland trade turned out extremely well but that was more just bizarre on behalf of Beane since Donaldson had 4 years of cheap-ish team control left, and wasn't a typical prospects-for-veteran(s) trade. But both prospects we gave up turned out as best as they could have hoped so far.


I don't disagree with your premise (cheap players are important to have), but I think the way you got there is misleading. For instance, d'Arnaud accumulated a 4 war in five seasons. Sure, it's surplus value when he makes nothing over five years, but it doesn't mean he's a good player. Henderson Alvarez had one and a half average/good seasons before his arm turned into hamburger meat, but of course if you use that sample and prorate it over X amount of years it sounds a lot better because you are not factoring him not pitching in '16 and '17 (and in 2016 he made $4m for a year long DL stint).

Like I said, I did not agree with AA's moves, I probably would have continued the rebuilding phase he was on even though I wasn't a big fan of his moves overall even before the 2013 craziness, but the Jays did not miss out on any difference making talent aside from Syndergaard. The Jays can get comparable value to the majority of guys they lost, but they can't find comparable value to an ace. If all the Jays can get for their existing assets are players that have a 4 war over 5 years, then yes, I'd pass and rather get those players by dangling the Hutchison's and Liriano's of the world, rather than the JD's and Happ's.
Tanner
Veteran
Posts: 2,829
And1: 4,173
Joined: Jul 04, 2016

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#195 » by Tanner » Wed Aug 2, 2017 12:57 am

The_Hater wrote:The Jays don't have to juggle the baseball end with the business end, ownership chooses to do that because they're forever shortsighted. That's the main reason the JAys wnt over 20 years between playoff appearances, because they tried to stay relavent instead of taking a longer term view of the franchise. And all this is going to do from a business end is chase the fanbase away once again because if you win 75 games or 60, you still aren't playing meaningful baseball in August and September.

Anyways, I think we have excellent management in place, I just wish ownership would get out of their way and let them build this franchise properly just like Gillick did in the 1980's. It's obvious to me and many others that ownership not managemnet wants us to compete in 2018. Common sense and history tells us this direction is a mistake.


That's what I meant; with Rogers, the Jays have to juggle the two because that's how Rogers operates. It doesn't seem to matter who the GM/president is. That's why I think the way Shapiro is going about this is the best way. Maybe his hands are tied and he can't scorch earth like people here want, but he can build up the farm system, trade pieces in deals where the Jays get better value than they give up, and have a more fluid restructuring of the roster rather than choosing one extreme or the other. I think they can pull it off. Even if they try to fake contend to keep attendance up and it results in sub-.500 or .500 finishes, that doesn't mean the front office will pull an Alex and gut three quarters of the farm system to do it. I have way more faith in them than that.
polo007
General Manager
Posts: 8,546
And1: 2,652
Joined: Nov 02, 2006

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#196 » by polo007 » Wed Aug 2, 2017 1:24 am

Read on Twitter
vaff87
RealGM
Posts: 23,707
And1: 70,824
Joined: Oct 22, 2003
         

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#197 » by vaff87 » Wed Aug 2, 2017 1:33 am

I don't really see why it's a "missed opportunity". They can still do it in the off-season/next year's deadline.
polo007
General Manager
Posts: 8,546
And1: 2,652
Joined: Nov 02, 2006

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#198 » by polo007 » Wed Aug 2, 2017 2:27 am

Following the Toronto Blue Jays' actions at the trade deadline, GM Ross Atkins joined Bob McCown and Arden Zwelling on Prime Time Sports to talk about the moves the team made, and how you come to the conclusion of trading certain players.

http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_demand-5/Ross-Atkins-on-Prime-Time-Sports-PTS-20170801-Interview.mp3

“Really, that’s one of the benefits of having not traded him (Marco Estrada). It increases our likelihood to stay more engaged and focus on him as an alternative for 2018.”

“We’ll see. That takes two parties. And we’ve got to work through alternatives, and work though all of the scenarios.”

“It’s not going to happen overnight that we have a robust farm system and we have a very young, controllable major league team that’s extremely athletic, extremely versatile, extremely durable, with depth.”

“We benefitted from [Houston’s] depth greatly. I don’t think that Teoscar Hernandez would’ve been available to us had they not had so much outfield depth.
They were moving from an area of depth that most teams with an asset like that are not moving at a trade deadline in a rental scenario."

“That’s a compliment to [Houston.] They’ve been able to build up that much depth. We’re going to continue to obsess on that, on building from the bottom and building from within. It’s just going to take time. If we can continue to win while we’re doing that, that’s the grand slam. That’s the home run. That’s what we’re trying to do.”
User avatar
SharoneWright
RealGM
Posts: 27,309
And1: 12,462
Joined: Aug 03, 2006
Location: A low-variance future conducive to raising children
     

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#199 » by SharoneWright » Wed Aug 2, 2017 4:39 am

polo007 wrote:Following the Toronto Blue Jays' actions at the trade deadline, GM Ross Atkins joined Bob McCown and Arden Zwelling on Prime Time Sports to talk about the moves the team made, and how you come to the conclusion of trading certain players.

http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_demand-5/Ross-Atkins-on-Prime-Time-Sports-PTS-20170801-Interview.mp3

“Really, that’s one of the benefits of having not traded him (Marco Estrada). It increases our likelihood to stay more engaged and focus on him as an alternative for 2018.”

“We’ll see. That takes two parties. And we’ve got to work through alternatives, and work though all of the scenarios.”

“It’s not going to happen overnight that we have a robust farm system and we have a very young, controllable major league team that’s extremely athletic, extremely versatile, extremely durable, with depth.”

“We benefitted from [Houston’s] depth greatly. I don’t think that Teoscar Hernandez would’ve been available to us had they not had so much outfield depth.
They were moving from an area of depth that most teams with an asset like that are not moving at a trade deadline in a rental scenario."

“That’s a compliment to [Houston.] They’ve been able to build up that much depth. We’re going to continue to obsess on that, on building from the bottom and building from within. It’s just going to take time. If we can continue to win while we’re doing that, that’s the grand slam. That’s the home run. That’s what we’re trying to do.”


Well, we were Houston. But in a matter of 18 months we blew our wad. We were set up for years and years and years. And by the time our multiple exciting young assets needed to be paid, we still would've been in control. Who to sign, when to promote, who to keep, who to trade. What kind of control do we have now? Over Tulo's contract, Martin's contract, even Jose's one year contract...? nobody wants them. Over the free agents that have left us like Price/Lowe/Johnson Buehrle(rt.)... who cost us significant assets, and Encarnacion because we screwed our budget? They are all now a sunk cost and lost for nothing. The lingering pain for me is that we are no longer masters of our own destiny. We are beggars. We are subject to crappy contracts, crappy trade values, and a crappy farm system. And we did it to ourselves. And we had it in the bag. A sustainable, home grown juggernaut. Just needed a modicum of patience. This is going to take a while to turn around. But if we tear it down now (like literally, yesterday), our timing may coincide with the arrival of Guerrero/Bichette,, and as Schad has pointed out a number of times, the potential dénouement of the Sox/Yankees.
Is anybody here a marine biologist?
User avatar
Ong_dynasty
Head Coach
Posts: 6,383
And1: 351
Joined: May 28, 2003
Location: London
         

Re: MLB Non-Waiver Trade Deadline 

Post#200 » by Ong_dynasty » Wed Aug 2, 2017 5:48 am

SharoneWright wrote:
polo007 wrote:Following the Toronto Blue Jays' actions at the trade deadline, GM Ross Atkins joined Bob McCown and Arden Zwelling on Prime Time Sports to talk about the moves the team made, and how you come to the conclusion of trading certain players.

http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_demand-5/Ross-Atkins-on-Prime-Time-Sports-PTS-20170801-Interview.mp3

“Really, that’s one of the benefits of having not traded him (Marco Estrada). It increases our likelihood to stay more engaged and focus on him as an alternative for 2018.”

“We’ll see. That takes two parties. And we’ve got to work through alternatives, and work though all of the scenarios.”

“It’s not going to happen overnight that we have a robust farm system and we have a very young, controllable major league team that’s extremely athletic, extremely versatile, extremely durable, with depth.”

“We benefitted from [Houston’s] depth greatly. I don’t think that Teoscar Hernandez would’ve been available to us had they not had so much outfield depth.
They were moving from an area of depth that most teams with an asset like that are not moving at a trade deadline in a rental scenario."

“That’s a compliment to [Houston.] They’ve been able to build up that much depth. We’re going to continue to obsess on that, on building from the bottom and building from within. It’s just going to take time. If we can continue to win while we’re doing that, that’s the grand slam. That’s the home run. That’s what we’re trying to do.”


Well, we were Houston. But in a matter of 18 months we blew our wad. We were set up for years and years and years. And by the time our multiple exciting young assets needed to be paid, we still would've been in control. Who to sign, when to promote, who to keep, who to trade. What kind of control do we have now? Over Tulo's contract, Martin's contract, even Jose's one year contract...? nobody wants them. Over the free agents that have left us like Price/Lowe/Johnson Buehrle(rt.)... who cost us significant assets, and Encarnacion because we screwed our budget? They are all now a sunk cost and lost for nothing. The lingering pain for me is that we are no longer masters of our own destiny. We are beggars. We are subject to crappy contracts, crappy trade values, and a crappy farm system. And we did it to ourselves. And we had it in the bag. A sustainable, home grown juggernaut. Just needed a modicum of patience. This is going to take a while to turn around. But if we tear it down now (like literally, yesterday), our timing may coincide with the arrival of Guerrero/Bichette,, and as Schad has pointed out a number of times, the potential dénouement of the Sox/Yankees.


Don't make it sound like 2 years of playoff baseball with both a decent chance of making the World Series is nothing.
Also were we really like the Astros? Do you really think a team with the players we gave up could be steam rolling the al east? I doubt that. That's the problem..we gave up Thor and maybe Hoffman and could argue we could have a great staff now. But would you have been happy with our hitters? Probably not.

Return to Toronto Blue Jays