Offseason Trade Ideas

[Guest]

Sticking with the Rockies, what about a deal centered around Alcantara and Blackmon?

[Cubswin11]

Sticking with the Rockies, what about a deal centered around Alcantara and Blackmon?

Why? What is there to like about Blackmon?

[Guest]

Sticking with the Rockies, what about a deal centered around Alcantara and Blackmon?

Why? What is there to like about Blackmon?

 

He can hit, probably play a passable CF, is left handed, potentially available with a crowded OF, and is under team control for 4 years. I haven't fully convinced myself Alcantara for him is a terrific deal, but he's a pretty good target for those who want a more certain bat added to take pressure off the prospects to produce.

[rawaction]

Sticking with the Rockies, what about a deal centered around Alcantara and Blackmon?

Why? What is there to like about Blackmon?

 

He can hit, probably play a passable CF, is left handed, potentially available with a crowded OF, and is under team control for 4 years. I haven't fully convinced myself Alcantara for him is a terrific deal, but he's a pretty good target for those who want a more certain bat added to take pressure off the prospects to produce.

 

Eh. I wouldn't trade Alcantara for him (probably wouldn't trade what it would take to get him). But there are some things to like about Blackmon, and he's the exact type of player I've been thinking about when thinking of the Cubs adding a capable OF, while also "saving" a spot for Russell and/or Bryant. There are also some things to not like, especially when compared to Alcantara. Are we sure Blackmon is not a platoon player? Hasn't really hit LHP that well. He's under control for 4 years, but is turning 28 halfway thru next season. Then there's the whole Coors Field thing. Obviously, he has favorable home splits too. And I'm not sure how that power will translate in Wrigley. I wouldn't trade Alcantara for him because I believe AA has more power, is younger, and is a switch hitter with position flexibility.

[Guest]

The Pirates probably value him highly enough that this wouldn't be an exact one for one deal, but what about Wood for Alvarez? Both had been pretty steady if not great performers before down years in 2014, and both are 2nd year arb eligible. Alvarez has more upside and slightly higher previous highs, while Wood's been more steady at avoiding extreme valleys. The Pirates will need rotation help and Wood could thrive in PNC with Marte/Cutch/Polanco running down his flyballs. The Cubs could use IF depth and signing a quality FA will be a tough sell with all the young talent. Alvarez gets a chance to get right with lower expectations and a new coaching staff.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The Pirates probably value him highly enough that this wouldn't be an exact one for one deal, but what about Wood for Alvarez? Both had been pretty steady if not great performers before down years in 2014, and both are 2nd year arb eligible. Alvarez has more upside and slightly higher previous highs, while Wood's been more steady at avoiding extreme valleys. The Pirates will need rotation help and Wood could thrive in PNC with Marte/Cutch/Polanco running down his flyballs. The Cubs could use IF depth and signing a quality FA will be a tough sell with all the young talent. Alvarez gets a chance to get right with lower expectations and a new coaching staff.

 

Want want want want want

[Guest]

The Pirates probably value him highly enough that this wouldn't be an exact one for one deal, but what about Wood for Alvarez? Both had been pretty steady if not great performers before down years in 2014, and both are 2nd year arb eligible. Alvarez has more upside and slightly higher previous highs, while Wood's been more steady at avoiding extreme valleys. The Pirates will need rotation help and Wood could thrive in PNC with Marte/Cutch/Polanco running down his flyballs. The Cubs could use IF depth and signing a quality FA will be a tough sell with all the young talent. Alvarez gets a chance to get right with lower expectations and a new coaching staff.

I think it is ok value-wise, but I am certainly not giving up an asset for a 3B at this point.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The Pirates probably value him highly enough that this wouldn't be an exact one for one deal, but what about Wood for Alvarez? Both had been pretty steady if not great performers before down years in 2014, and both are 2nd year arb eligible. Alvarez has more upside and slightly higher previous highs, while Wood's been more steady at avoiding extreme valleys. The Pirates will need rotation help and Wood could thrive in PNC with Marte/Cutch/Polanco running down his flyballs. The Cubs could use IF depth and signing a quality FA will be a tough sell with all the young talent. Alvarez gets a chance to get right with lower expectations and a new coaching staff.

I think it is ok value-wise, but I am certainly not giving up an asset for a 3B at this point.

 

I would. Bryant might be an outfielder and Baez might have terminal brettjacksonitis.

[Guest]

The Pirates probably value him highly enough that this wouldn't be an exact one for one deal, but what about Wood for Alvarez? Both had been pretty steady if not great performers before down years in 2014, and both are 2nd year arb eligible. Alvarez has more upside and slightly higher previous highs, while Wood's been more steady at avoiding extreme valleys. The Pirates will need rotation help and Wood could thrive in PNC with Marte/Cutch/Polanco running down his flyballs. The Cubs could use IF depth and signing a quality FA will be a tough sell with all the young talent. Alvarez gets a chance to get right with lower expectations and a new coaching staff.

I think it is ok value-wise, but I am certainly not giving up an asset for a 3B at this point.

 

Here's the thing about assets though, in the case of our back-end SP options(currently Jaxon, Wood, Hendricks, Turner, Doubront, Straily), there are likely 2, maybe 3 roster spots for them, and only Hendricks(likely one of the 2-3) and Straily can be sent down. So if the plan is to add 2 SP like it appears to be, getting value for one or more of them(or just whatever you can get in Jaxon's case) is probably your best play.

 

Then the question is, what do you use those assets on? Right now the biggest target for the offseason is the front of the rotation, and guys like Wood aren't going to be much help in acquiring one of those.

 

You could add to the outfield, there's opportunity there. But at the same time there's some decent FA options and more general opportunity because less is settled than the IF. Who are you 100% confident will be a starting OF come September 1? I'll say Soler, but either Bryant or Alcantara could be moved back to the IF, and Alcantara could play himself out of the lineup entirely. Bottom line, it's an easier sell to get depth guys to come via FA, and even if not, you have depth guys with Coghlan, Ruggiano, and Sweeney.

 

So if not the rotation and not the outfield, where? Bullpen? Maybe, not a ton of matches for that type of deal though. Catcher? I'd be game, but again there aren't a world of trade options for the case of a guy like Wood. That leaves the infield, where we almost certainly do not need a starter to begin the year, but by June 1 Bryant could be in LF, Baez could have a 45% K rate, Russell could still need more time, and Valbuena could regress(those are roughly in most likely to least likely order, for me). So if some hole opens up, even if it's some type of part time role, we're left with Mike Olt, Logan Watkins, or whatever FA with low enough self esteem to join the best collection of young infield talent since ever.

 

Bottom line, is 3B some absolute need? Nope. Are there more glaring needs we can easily fix with the assets in the rotation(which have an expiration date)? I don't think that's necessarily true either.

[Guest]

That's a bit of a rambling answer, even for me, so let's try and make it simpler.

 

- Our SP assets have an expiration date

 

- You can use the same logic that would lead you not to worry about adding an IF to not worry about adding an OF

 

- Our SP assets can't be used to get our greatest need, top of rotation arms. Similar logic applies to upgrading the bullpen(which also has roster space issues)

 

- If you can make a good deal for a catcher(Grandal? Gattis??), go for it. Otherwise getting a 3B for an excess SP is a pretty similar option to the reasonable alternatives.

[Guest]

I think it comes down to you being more pessimistic about Bryant's defense at 3B than me.

[davell]

I'd rather just sign Rasmus on a one year deal or give Markakis the 4/48 MLBTR projects he'll get, than trade an Alcantara or something like that for Blackmon.

[Guest]

I think it comes down to you being more pessimistic about Bryant's defense at 3B than me.

 

There doesn't need to be a full-time opening for it to be a good decision. Olt, Valaika, and Watkins had 450 PA this year. Bonifacio played 30 games on the infield. Plus Barney was here half the year.

[Guest]

I think it comes down to you being more pessimistic about Bryant's defense at 3B than me.

 

There doesn't need to be a full-time opening for it to be a good decision. Olt, Valaika, and Watkins had 450 PA this year. Bonifacio played 30 games on the infield. Plus Barney was here half the year.

And if Bryant is playing 3B, then there aren't that many AB's to go around for awful players on the IF.

[Guest]

A poster w/944 posts at PSD is claiming the following:

 

Take this for what it's worth...

 

My friend has a friend that is in the Nationals organization and he told me that there is a potential deal in the works for castro.

All he told me was Gio González, stud reliever, and 2 or 3 pitching specs.

Again take this with a grain of salt.

 

From our end, I don't believe it. Maybe they're pursuing him with that package but no thanks.

[treebird]

A poster w/944 posts at PSD is claiming the following:

 

Take this for what it's worth...

 

My friend has a friend that is in the Nationals organization and he told me that there is a potential deal in the works for castro.

All he told me was Gio González, stud reliever, and 2 or 3 pitching specs.

Again take this with a grain of salt.

 

given what i assume is the perceived value of castro around the league, i suspect the nats would hesitate to trade gio alone for castro.

[sneakypower]

Alvarez? Rasmus?

 

we might really have the most easily exploited 'good' lineup ever if we heavily pursue these avenues

[Guest]

Really interested to see who the reliever and prospects would be in that hypothetical. Gonzalez is certainly an appealing target.

[TruffleShuffle]

gonzalez is definitely an appealing target; i'm just trying to figure out what the nats' motivation would be in trading him. ian desmond is fine, and while they do have a deep rotation, fister is a free agent after 2015 and isn't as good as his ERA the last year or two, and roark is nowhere near as good as his 2014 ERA. plus jordan zimmermann gets way more expensive in 2015 then becomes a UFA. strasburg is represented by boras and isn't likely to be signing a team-friendly deal anytime soon. i would think that some as good as gio gonzalez, while signed to a very team-friendly deal through 2018, is about the last asset they should be looking to deal.

[Splendid Splinter]

Really interested to see who the reliever and prospects would be in that hypothetical. Gonzalez is certainly an appealing target.

 

 

Stud reliever has to be either Storen or Clippard. Maybe Barrett. As far as pitching prospects, who is there after Giolito and Cole? I know Purke, but I think he had TJS this year. That's all I know in that system.

 

 

 

EDIT: I actually used "specs" instead of prospect. What a [expletive] idiot.

Edited October 18, 2014 by Splendid Splinter

[Guest]

gonzalez is definitely an appealing target; i'm just trying to figure out what the nats' motivation would be in trading him. ian desmond is fine, and while they do have a deep rotation, fister is a free agent after 2015 and isn't as good as his ERA the last year or two, and roark is nowhere near as good as his 2014 ERA. plus jordan zimmermann gets way more expensive in 2015 then becomes a UFA. strasburg is represented by boras and isn't likely to be signing a team-friendly deal anytime soon. i would think that some as good as gio gonzalez, while signed to a very team-friendly deal through 2018, is about the last asset they should be looking to deal.

 

Best guess is some longer term cost certainty. Gonzalez is the best contract of their starters, but they still have plenty of quality in the short term with Strasburg, Zimmerman, Fister, and Roark. Their top 2 prospects are quality SP for the long term as well in Giolito and Cole. That deal also saves them several million in the short term so they could add a stop-gap starter, get an infielder and trade Desmond for pitching, any number of things.

 

All that said, it's a bit flimsy for a trade of such magnitude, so they'd have to really love Castro in order for that to be a legitimate reason.

[Guest]

We should probably start a Castro thread for all the rumors that will be flying this offseason.

[nolanwood]

A poster w/944 posts at PSD is claiming the following:

 

Take this for what it's worth...

 

My friend has a friend that is in the Nationals organization and he told me that there is a potential deal in the works for castro.

All he told me was Gio González, stud reliever, and 2 or 3 pitching specs.

Again take this with a grain of salt.

 

given what i assume is the perceived value of castro around the league, i suspect the nats would hesitate to trade gio alone for castro.

 

What do you assume the perceived value around the league is for a 24 year old, 3 WAR Shortstop signed to a 60/7 contract?

[Guest]

...specs...

Please don't

[Vinestal]

...specs...

Please don't

I don't even... Wtf is a spec? Is this some new slang? Get off my lawn!? :-k