Mets/LAD/NYy interested in Alexei, according to Levine

[Bob Sacamano]

I don't see any way Philly would make that deal.

 

Not saying that EXACT deal but as a starting point. Probably need another good prospect in there.

[witesoxfan]

Not saying that EXACT deal but as a starting point. Probably need another good prospect in there.

 

I think they'd need at least one more prospect and perhaps 2. Not sure a guy who struck out 40% of the time at the MLB level, a 1B in A ball, and a fill-in non-tender candidate is enough to prop up one good pitching prospect.

[caulfield12]

They're obviously not going to trade Soler, Russell or Bryant.

 

The problem becomes creating a package with what's left for one of the best pitchers in baseball (albeit a handsomely paid one).

 

The Phillies might be interested in a package centered around Castro, Edwards and McKinney if they could get someone to take Rollins off their hands.

 

Baez can't be the centerpiece right now, coming off his 2014.

[fathom]

Baez, Wellington, Edwards and someone like McKinney would definitely get Hamels.

[Dunt]

Baez, Wellington, Edwards and someone like McKinney would definitely get Hamels.

 

Didn't they ask the Dodgers for Pederson, Seager, and Urias for Hamels? I dont see that getting it done

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

I know Bowden made a speculative "trades that could happen" article and that was one. That's the only mention I've ever seen of it at least.

 

Bowden is terrible.

[GreenSox]

I don't see any way Philly would make that deal.

The problem Philly has is Lester and Scherzer. Why give up players when you don't have to?

[caulfield12]

Bowden did speculate about Miller, CarGo and Heyward moving.

[caulfield12]

The problem Philly has is Lester and Scherzer. Why give up players when you don't have to?

 

 

 

 

Because Hamels isn't coming with a $125-175 million price tag and huge long-term commitment that will make nearly every team uncomfortable on its backend with the ages/wear and tear on those two guys (multiple playoff runs to extend their seasons) and the spate of TJ surgeries.

 

Strictly for teams in "win now" mode like the Royals two offseasons ago when they dealt Myers and Odorizzi for Shields and Davis.

Edited November 18, 2014 by caulfield12

[GreenSox]

Because Hamels isn't coming with a $125-175 million price tag and huge long-term commitment that will make nearly every team uncomfortable on its backend with the ages/wear and tear on those two guys (multiple playoff runs to extend their seasons) and the spate of TJ surgeries.

 

Strictly for teams in "win now" mode like the Royals two offseasons ago when they dealt Myers and Odorizzi for Shields and Davis.

Hammels is $110 million. Teams will give $20 mill easy to save their prospects.

I'm trying to figure out who exactly which team pay Scherzer what Boras wants.

[Eminor3rd]

Bowden did speculate about Miller, CarGo and Heyward moving.

 

You know what they say about a broken clock?

[greg775]

Sox can't dump Alexei until there's somebody who can play short and not be a black hole at the plate. It's that simple. Sox will be a horrific baseball team if he's replaced right now. Sox have nobody "ready" who can hit or field like him.

Sox claim they want to contend. He will NOT be traded. No brainer, just like we weren't getting Victor. 100 percent Lexi stays.

[BlackSox13]

Hammels is $110 million. Teams will give $20 mill easy to save their prospects.

I'm trying to figure out who exactly which team pay Scherzer what Boras wants.

Good point. Its likely Hamel's goes nowhere until Scherzer, Lester and Shields are off the market. Why give 3 or four prospects when you can sign a free agent and give up only one draft pick?

 

As for Scherzer. I have no clue as to who will go 6+ years and 150+M for him. The Yanks have already said no, the Dodgers are trimming payroll, I doubt the Tigers have the money though I could be wrong, maybe Boston? I think its possible Scherzer may have to lower his demands.

[caulfield12]

Good point. Its likely Hamel's goes nowhere until Scherzer, Lester and Shields are off the market. Why give 3 or four prospects when you can sign a free agent and give up only one draft pick?

 

As for Scherzer. I have no clue as to who will go 6+ years and 150+M for him. The Yanks have already said no, the Dodgers are trimming payroll, I doubt the Tigers have the money though I could be wrong, maybe Boston? I think its possible Scherzer may have to lower his demands.

 

 

If they can clear 2 of 3 (Kemp, Ethier, Crawford) off their payroll, then they're definitely in play for Scherzer.

 

Maybe JUST Kemp.

[caulfield12]

Hammels is $110 million. Teams will give $20 mill easy to save their prospects.

I'm trying to figure out who exactly which team pay Scherzer what Boras wants.

 

 

It's "only" $96 million guaranteed, including a $6 million buyout of his final year.

 

$22.5 million for the next four years=$90 million

2015-2018

 

Then a $6 million buyout if they don't want to pay his salary ($20 million) in 2019.

 

 

 

So when you start talking about a $130-180 million commitment to Scherzer/Lester vs. $96 million, there's still a pretty significant difference.

Edited November 18, 2014 by caulfield12

[BlackSox13]

If they can clear 2 of 3 (Kemp, Ethier, Crawford) off their payroll, then they're definitely in play for Scherzer.

 

Maybe JUST Kemp.

Last I read the Dodgers were looking to drop payroll to below 190M. Signing Scherzer while getting below 190M to avoid the luxury tax will be a hell of a trick to pull off. To afford Scherzer, the Dodgers need to get their current payroll down to the 160-165M range.

[Lillian]

To follow up on the Ethier specualation: Could the Dodgers be willing to just have someone take him and his contract, with no trade involved. He might be worth the $18 Million per year, for 3 years, if it didn't require giving up a prospect. I'd pay a premium not to have to sign someone to a longer contract than 3 years, especially for a player in his mid 30's. Moreover, we wouldn't lose a draft pick.

 

My biggest concern is whether or not he is good enough to bat in the middle of the lineup, versus RHP. He definitely is not suitable vs. LHP. Against RHP, he has been almost as good as V. Martinez. His career average is over .300, with an OBP of .383 and a Slugging % of over .500. That would work!!! The problem is that he would really need to be platooned. However, the Sox have enough right handed hitters, with whom he could be platooned. That would also give him a little rest, which might help an aging player. It all depends upon whether or not last year was an aberration, or the beginning of a serious decline.

Edited November 18, 2014 by Lillian

[harfman77]

Sox can't dump Alexei until there's somebody who can play short and not be a black hole at the plate. It's that simple. Sox will be a horrific baseball team if he's replaced right now. Sox have nobody "ready" who can hit or field like him.

Sox claim they want to contend. He will NOT be traded. No brainer, just like we weren't getting Victor. 100 percent Lexi stays.

 

He definitely will be traded if Hahn gets more in value in return than he feels Alexei is worth. Semien can play SS for the next couple of seasons until Anderson is ready, Sanchez can play there as well.

 

I doubt any team will offer Hahn enough to get him interested in dealing Alexei, but he is not untouchable by any means.

[harfman77]

To follow up on the Ethier specualation: Could the Dodgers be willing to just have someone take him and his contract, with no trade involved. He might be worth the $18 Million per year, for 3 years, if it didn't require giving up a prospect. I'd pay a premium not to have to sign someone to a longer contract than 3 years, especially for a player in his mid 30's. Moreover, we wouldn't lose a draft pick.

 

My biggest concern is whether or not he is good enough to bat in the middle of the lineup, versus RHP. He definitely is not suitable vs. LHP. Against RHP, he has been almost as good as V. Martinez. His career average is over .300, with an OBP of .383 and a Slugging % of over .500. That would work!!! The problem is that he would really need to be platooned. However, the Sox have enough right handed hitters, with whom he could be platooned. That would also give him a little rest, which might help an aging player. It all depends upon whether or not last year was an aberration, or the beginning of a serious decline.

 

No. They are not in any financial hardship and will not give up players of value for only salary relief. You may be able to get them to swap Danks for Ethier as they need someone to fill in the back of their rotation. The $71M he is owed over the next four years is an awful lot of salary to take on for a platoon player at the back end of his career, especially one that hits a replacement level.

[Lillian]

No. They are not in any financial hardship and will not give up players of value for only salary relief. You may be able to get them to swap Danks for Ethier as they need someone to fill in the back of their rotation. The $71M he is owed over the next four years is an awful lot of salary to take on for a platoon player at the back end of his career, especially one that hits a replacement level.

 

It's $56 Million for 3 years, including the $2.5 Million buy out, and the Sox wouldn't lose a draft pick. He has been a very good hitter his whole career until last year. If he can put up his normal numbers, he's a better hitter than Alex Rios, or Melky Cabrera vs. RHP.

 

 

[harfman77]

It's $56 Million for 3 years, including the $2.5 Million buy out, and the Sox wouldn't lose a draft pick. He has been a very good hitter his whole career until last year. If he can put up his normal numbers, he's a better hitter than Alex Rios, or Melky Cabrera vs. RHP.

 

The buyout only comes into play if the option doesn't vest, since we don't know what it takes for the option to vest, you can't assume he doesn't meet the standards in the contract. He is getting older, he will be 33 when the season starts, and there is no reason to think that last year wasn't the start of his decline as he ages. I would certainly not risk hamstringing the club financially on the chance that last season was a fluke and that he will produce at a high level in his age 33-37 seasons.

[witesoxfan]

The buyout only comes into play if the option doesn't vest, since we don't know what it takes for the option to vest, you can't assume he doesn't meet the standards in the contract. He is getting older, he will be 33 when the season starts, and there is no reason to think that last year wasn't the start of his decline as he ages. I would certainly not risk hamstringing the club financially on the chance that last season was a fluke and that he will produce at a high level in his age 33-37 seasons.

 

Andre Ethier cf

5 years/$85M (2013-17), plus 2018 option

•5 years/$85M (2013-17), plus 2018 club option •signed extension with LA Dodgers 6/12/12

•13:$13.5M, 14:$15.5M, 15:$18M, 16:$18M, 17:$17.5M, 18:$17.5M club option ($2.5M buyout)

•2018 salary guaranteed with 550 plate appearances in 2017 or 1,100 PAs in 2017-18

•perks: use of stadium luxury box for eight games each season

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/compensa...ngeles-dodgers/

[Lillian]

I agree that Ethier's poor performance last year is the big concern. If he has indeed begun his decline, and last year is representative of what that decline will look like, his acquisition would be a horrible mistake. Is there some other explanation for what happened last year, aside from his somewhat limited playing time, and his being disgruntled over it?

Edited November 18, 2014 by Lillian

[Eminor3rd]

Ethier is NOT getting 550 PAs in 2017. He's already a platoon bat.

[LDF]

 

I think I am crazy in coming back to this thread.

 

I am more than sure the sox / Hahn kick the tires on the Mets and what

they can or what the sox wants for a rtn on a trade. but they have a very

good variety of prospects, arms and hitters. I would prefer a trade with them

than the Dodgers. the Dodgers have arms and an expensive OF'er.