southsider2k5 Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 09:13 AM) The amount of money owed to Stanton dwarfs ALL of those. He is basically owed a full free agent contract at best. He has zero surplus value, if teams are giving up large amounts of talent for him on top of taking on that deal, they are fools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 09:47 AM) He is basically owed a full free agent contract at best. He has zero surplus value, if teams are giving up large amounts of talent for him on top of taking on that deal, they are fools. Correct. You'd already be paying full price for production, so the additional compensation would just be for rights. Which is difficult to price out, but no way do I see anyone giving up an all star back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 07:55 AM) Correct. You'd already be paying full price for production, so the additional compensation would just be for rights. Which is difficult to price out, but no way do I see anyone giving up an all star back. Avisail? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 09:33 AM) I still maintain that if Stanton is moved he gets moved for very little. I think so too. If the team trading for him takes on all of his salary, you're probably looking at what, a B and 2 C prospects type of package? Guys who would fill in after the prospects you get for moving Yelich and Ozuna. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 10:20 AM) Avisail? Yes I'd actually still be okay with this, but I guess a multiple All-Star like Bogaerts/Betts aren't going back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarComing25 Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 The opt out is going to kill a lot of his value too. Either he plays well enough and then leaves or he doesn't perform and you're stuck with an albatross. Not a very attractive bet to make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thxfrthmmrs Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 I do not have a doubt that Stanton gets moved in the next couple of months, and I hope it's not to the Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted October 27, 2017 Author Share Posted October 27, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 09:33 AM) I still maintain that if Stanton is moved he gets moved for very little. Same here. He's not gonna fetch that Boston package. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 11:32 AM) The opt out is going to kill a lot of his value too. Either he plays well enough and then leaves or he doesn't perform and you're stuck with an albatross. Not a very attractive bet to make. Exactly, and this is oft-overlooked by the mainstream press. Basically, if you're fortunate, and he ages well enough that he can still provide surplus value into the back half of the deal, then you lose him to free agency. The ONLY situation in where you pay him all that money is if he ISN'T worth it. So even if you're a gambling type, the upside is limited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 03:46 PM) Exactly, and this is oft-overlooked by the mainstream press. Basically, if you're fortunate, and he ages well enough that he can still provide surplus value into the back half of the deal, then you lose him to free agency. The ONLY situation in where you pay him all that money is if he ISN'T worth it. So even if you're a gambling type, the upside is limited. Again, just no good reasons to give up a lot for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boopa1219 Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 He's going to look really good playing for the Giants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coco1997 Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 04:49 PM) He's going to look really good playing for the Giants. What would the Giants give up prospect-wise? I thought their system was notoriously barren. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 When is his opt-out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 28, 2017 -> 08:10 AM) When is his opt-out? After 2020. If he opts out, you've likely gotten a very nice 2020 season from him, which is right in the beginning of your window. Agreed that you don't want to move a whole lot of extremely valuable assets, but if he does opt out, he basically just needs to be a 3 war player for the next 3 years. It isn't as though there isn't a scenario where that ends up being valuable. While he has been volatile, over the last 4 years he has averaged about 4.75 fwar, with two of those seasons being over 6 fwar and 3 of them being 3.9 fwar or greater. If he was to average 4.5 fwar over those three years, while paying $77 million, you are obviously coming out with some surplus value in the range of $35 million or so? After 2020, he'll still have basically $218 million remaining heading into his age 31 season. If he does decide to opt out of THAT, I'm going to guess that he has produced a LOT of surplus value between 2018-2020. The risk lies much more so that he doesn't perform well, or he suffers a serious injury, and you get stuck with that entire contract, which is what drives the price down. I suspect the odds that he can still provide 3 war over his 31-35 year seasons is pretty reasonable. You're likely going to overpay him a lot in 2025-2027, which is why the surplus values have to be substantial at the beginning of the contract. You also have to consider that in the mid-2020's, you'll be making decisions whether to pay some of the core that came up to the big league team between 2019-2021. Jimenez, Kopech, Robert, Hansen, Rutherford, Cease, etc. Do you want to miss out on opportunities to sign one or more of those guys (plus other FAs) because you are paying Stanton still? Obviously it is a tough decision, but I'm not sure it is as cut and dry as some might suggest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 08:13 AM) The amount of money owed to Stanton dwarfs ALL of those. But, he can hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 08:33 AM) I still maintain that if Stanton is moved he gets moved for very little. Depends on how good Jeter is at finessing the other GMs. Remember, this is Jeter's first rodeo. All it takes is one or two teams to offer a real package for Stanton, and the bidding will start. It will be interesting, and the Boston GM is probably salivating right now. They need some home run power, and they can probably afford Stanton. However, I don't know where they stand on the luxury tax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggins Posted October 29, 2017 Share Posted October 29, 2017 QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 03:49 PM) He's going to look really good playing for the Giants. The Giants strike me as the team to bid against themselves for JD Martinez and end up paying him like, 6/110. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarComing25 Posted October 29, 2017 Share Posted October 29, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (daggins @ Oct 29, 2017 -> 09:59 AM) The Giants strike me as the team to bid against themselves for JD Martinez and end up paying him like, 6/110. I think Boston is going to make a major push for JD, they need power badly. I know their OF is currently full but if they get JD they can always trade Bradley or move Martinez to first, it’s not like he’s a good defensive outfielder anyway. Edited October 29, 2017 by OmarComing25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted October 29, 2017 Share Posted October 29, 2017 If he goes anywhere I think it will be to the Cardinals based on what Heyman has been reporting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted October 29, 2017 Share Posted October 29, 2017 QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Oct 29, 2017 -> 11:49 AM) If he goes anywhere I think it will be to the Cardinals based on what Heyman has been reporting. Heyman just literally wrote an article about how the Giants were the front-runners for him..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 The Cards are well under the cap for next year so they can afford Stanton. They also have much more to offer in a trade than SF. Bader and O'Neill are better than anything SF has to offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Oct 29, 2017 -> 03:13 PM) Heyman just literally wrote an article about how the Giants were the front-runners for him..... Just last week Heyman reported the Cardinals based on the fact that ownership has announced because of the Fox Sports Midwest money coming in they are now prepared to pay to upgrade the talent on the big league club. He also said the Cardinals farm system is well stocked and they have the prospects to send to Miami for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 I'd be shocked if the Cards don't make a serious run at him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Trading for guys owed a ton of money after a career year usually leads to regret. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 (edited) Whether you think adding Stanton is a good idea or not, I just can’t agree with the timing. We should not spend big this offseason as it will be a year too early IMO. If you’re going to take on the considerable risk that is Stanton’s contract, you need to make sure you’re timing the addition right to ensure the biggest potential payoff. I know people are skeptical, but I’d rather see us active in the epic 2018/19 free agent class (even if there is competition) than just jump too early on Stanton. We should have the money to be serious players IMO. Edited October 30, 2017 by Chicago White Sox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.