Re: Tim Britton and Brian MacPherson talking Stanton trade
posted at 3/26/2014 12:13 PM EDT
In response to notin's comment:
In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
In response to moonslav59's comment:
In response to lasitter's comment:
In response to moonslav59's comment:
" love many of our prospects as much as many here, but Stanton is for real."
Everyone would love to have him, but I look at it another way: How many years of cheap team control would we be buying vs similar control given up in return. I would much rather have our prospects than Stanton.
I wish these sorts of trades would allow a much larger cash consideration aspect, but apparently the Commissioner's office does not permit this.
Again, I am against trading 5 good prospects for Stanton, unless it was something like WMB, Webster, de la Rosa, Margot and Johnson (not going to happen).
My guess is we'd extend Stanton at a reasonable cost with an up front bonus.
why would he take a "reasonable cost" If he DID stay healthy he would be in line for a monster contract.
I'd love to give him an upfront bonus to sign a more reasonable deal but the reality is that Boston has plenty of money and the only number that really matters is the AAV.
I'm starting to think more and more that trading for Stanton is a horrible ideal.
Stanton is not even that much of an AAV risk.
After 2015, how many big contracts do the Sox have on the books? Pedroia and anyone else? Lester coming soon I guess. Buchholz and Ortiz do have optins in that timeframe.
Let’s assume Stanton does come to Boston and is extended for $20mill per. The AAV risk is very much mitigated by having minimum wage players like Cecchini, Vazquez, Bogaerts, and Bradley, not to mention anyone else who works their way to the top of the ladder. Marrero? Margot?
SP: Lester, Buchholz, Doubront, Barnes? Webster? Ball? Workman? Britton and de la Rosa in pen.
The lineup, counting Stanton’s $20mill, would cost $33mill plus all the min wage guys. That leaves PLENTY of room for not only Papi’s $11mill option and get a platoon partner for Nava, but also to get a 1B. (Or Stanton could go to 1B, with Bryce Brentz taking over RF.) So for less than $50mill, the entire lineup is taken care of. Even if players like Bogaerts sign to pre-arb extensions, it might reach $60mill. (And Bogaerts is unlikely to sign one, being a Boras client and all.) And even then, that still leaves a paltry $120 or so million dollars to fill the rotation, bullpen and bench.
I don’t get the AAV concern at all.
And here is the kicker, that lineup actually doesn’t look that bad at all. I would actually consider it realistic AND competitive, although I would like to see an upgrade in RF instead of Brentz. Heck, there is still room to sign a RF and let Brentz platoon with Nava.
Now, let’s assume the Sox keep Betts, Owens, etc. Does THAT lineup look any better? It does look cheaper, but that is about it. In fact, with no position for Betts, and all the other players and prospects easily replaced, the only actual loss might be Owens.
As you said, that trade is unlikely. I base my opinion on what trade scanerio would actually logically pry Stanton away; that....I do not belive is worth it in any way.
Also WMB strained his back and leg, he's also very committed to a resistance training program that should mitigate those issues. Admittedly I do not know if Stanton is as committed, but I do know Stanton has missed time over 3 seasons where WMB hasn't even played in 3 seasons so it is a bit of a stretch to say his injury history is "significantly more" than that of Stantons. Stanton has had leg, knee and eye problems.
For some of those proposed trades, the weaker ones suggested...I would make, but like you said they will never happen.
Also in terms of being paid, Stanton is entering his arbitration years, and I think you are underestimating how costly that can get. Remember power numbers go a LONG way into computation arbitration for players. Some power hitters make north of $15 million by their last year of arbitration.
Also keep in mind that every player it would realistically take to pry Stanton away would come with 6 years of team control....so we are trading potentially 18 + years of team control for 3 years. We already added an impact player who is likely of Stantons caliber in Bogaerts and we got to the WS without him. With over 100 million coming off the books the next couple years (factoring in Ortiz and the possible Lester extension) I'd rather see the Sox go after a hitter in FA and hold onto their chips.
This is just my opinion, if you like Stanton fine but if we all were 100% certain we should trade away a bunch of chips for a premium player I'd rather go after a true bona fide #1 starter.