Re: Tim Britton and Brian MacPherson talking Stanton trade
posted at 3/25/2014 11:56 PM EDT
In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
If Stanton was a healthy specimen who has averaged 150 games a year the last several years, I'd be more inclined to consider that trade, but the injury questions surrounding Stanton seriously devalue him IMO.
IMO everyone is dreaming on Stantons talent, talent means nothing if you are riding the D.L. I'm as good as Mike Trout at baseball if we are both on the D.L. how much am I worth? My point is that we are all salivating over Stantons talents and it really feels like we are ignoring the risks.
I'd be the first one to trade for Stanton if the price came down, but I don't see it happening now, nor do I envision it coming down enough to justify that risk...because it is a HUGE risk.
You might be overstating Stanton’s injury past, especially in the face of the prospects involved. First of all, Stanton has played in over 115 games each of the past two injury-plagued seasons, getting over 500PA each time. He has played more games than Bryce Harper over that stretch. Would you trade that package for Harper?
If the price is Middlebrooks, Betts, Owens and Ranaudo/Johnson, what are you really giving up?
For all the talk about Stanton not being able to stay on the field, can we also say the same thing about Middlebrooks, whose injury history is actually far more severe? I’ll take a guy with a hammy pull over a guy with a broken wrist. Not to mention, Middlebrooks, who is older than Stanton, has actually had difficulty staying in the majors, let alone off the DL.
And if staying on the field is a concern, Johnson and Ranaudo are far bigger concerns than Stanton. Just because Ranaudo (also older than Stanton) managed to stay on the field last year does not mean all his physical problems are behind him. Sure, he will be cheaper than Stanton going forward, but it doesn’t mean much if he is on the DL. And Johnson (a couple months younger than Stanton) is not exactly proving himself durability-wise, either.
So really, it boils down to Betts and Owens. Both are excellent prospects, but if you can get 3 years of a top tier talent for 2 BA prospects outside the top 30, you have to go for it. For all of Betts talent, he may find himself without a position in Boston anyway. Betts is 3 years younger than Stanton, but where will he be in 3 years? And Owens certainly has a high ceiling, but he also has shown some question marks in both control and command. Both might be superstars. Both might be busts. Or, more likely, both will fall somewhere in between.
But the real point here is, in no way shape or form would this deal, should Florida even take it, come close to bankrupting the Sox farm system. Assuming Bogaerts and Bradley graduate to MLB, the new top ten would still likely contain Cecchini, Swihart, Webster, Barnes, Ball, Britton, Vazquez, Margot, Stankiewicz, and Marrero. That’s hardly barren. And there maybe a couple of wild cards like Rijo, Callahan and whoever stays between Ranaudo and Johnson who could also crack that list. You might even be able to work Workman and de la Rosa in there, as well, but I left those last two out for reasons solely related to age, MLB experience, and an overall questionable prospect status.
Not to mention all the upcoming draft picks the Sox will acquire this summer. If you can get Stanton, and hold on to 6 of the 8 BA top 100 prospects from this past year, the Sox are crazy not to do it. A big part of the value of prospects is their use as currency, and dealing #40 and #75 for Stanton is much better use of that currency than dealing many equally ranked prospects has been in the past.
If Miami took this deal, it would be an absolute heist. The ONLY reason not to make it is if there is suspicion that Florida knows something about Stanton’s health going forward. But even then, even if he is a complete physical disaster, his contract is hardly a burden right now. He will make $6.5mill this year, and is still in arbitration for the next two seasons. Joel Hanrahan made more money last year. In free agency, that salary gets you Jonny Gomes. The HUGE risk you keep talking about is actually a microscopic one, and could remain that way for 3 more years.
Of course, the real bottom line is Miami would never make this trade anyway…