AL East Notes: Price, Orioles, Morales, Drew

David Price's trade market has been somewhat slow to develop, as it may be harder than expected to find a team with both the means and the immediate need to pay the Rays' high asking price for their ace left-hander.  The Dodgers may not have enough Major League-ready prospects to pull off a Price deal, ESPN Los Angeles' Mark Saxon opines, though adding Yasiel Puig to the mix would certainly get Tampa Bay's attention.  The Cubs, meanwhile, have talented youngsters (Javier Baez, Kris Bryant, Jorge Soler, etc.) that could pry Price from the Rays, but ESPN Chicago's Jesse Rogers doesn't think it makes sense for the Cubs to short-circuit their rebuilding process just for two years of Price on a team that isn't ready to contend.

Here's some more from around the AL East…

  • The Orioles would have to give up their first round draft pick (17th overall) to sign Kendrys Morales, which FOX Sports Jon Morosi tweets is still "a substantial barrier" to Morales coming to Baltimore.  Still, the O's remain interested in the free agent slugger.  MLBTR's Jeff Todd recently examined the rather slim market for Morales, who is hampered by both the draft pick compensation and his defensive limitations.
  • The Red Sox want Stephen Drew back and hope to still re-sign him, manager John Farrell said during a radio appearance on WEEI's Hot Stove Show (partial transcript from WEEI.com's Alex Speier).  Boston's recent trade for Jonathan Herrera adds needed experience to their young left side of the infield, but Farrell said that there's mutual interest between Drew and the Sox in a reunion.
  • In AL East news from earlier today, the Orioles' deal with Grant Balfour may be held up due to a medical concern about Balfour's shoulder…the Orioles signed Xavier Paul to a minor league contract…we covered a number of Yankees-related items in a Yankees Notes post.


Leave a Reply

44 Comments on "AL East Notes: Price, Orioles, Morales, Drew"


Jose Villasano
1 year 7 months ago

The Dodgers are not trading nobody especially if it involves Puig

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
1 year 7 months ago

I’m sorry to be the guy who brings up grammar, but I just get so amused by a double negative like “not trading nobody.”

Jose Villasano
1 year 7 months ago

who cares as long as you understand

Todd Smith
1 year 7 months ago

Just to clarify… you do think the Dodgers are going to trade Puig, right?

EarlyMorningBoxscore
1 year 7 months ago

Thank you. Somebody understands the double negative cancels each other out and creates the affirmative.

mrnatewalter
mrnatewalter
1 year 7 months ago

That’s what the guy said.

BlueSkyLA
BlueSkyLA
1 year 7 months ago

Don’t never bring that up again.

johansantana15
1 year 7 months ago

That Yasiel Puig comment had me laughing heartily. The Dodgers would never ever trade Puig for Price, and it seems unlikely that the Rays would make the trade either. I can undoubtedly guarantee that deal will never happen. Mark Saxon needs to get hid head checked.

mrnatewalter
mrnatewalter
1 year 7 months ago

It would be interesting to see what might happen if they did, though.

If Kemp can rebound, or if Joc Pederson can be as good as they say, they would be switching out a really good outfield with a stupid good rotation.

I realize and agree it will never happen… but it’s interesting to speculate.

1 year 7 months ago

Looks like the Orioles are looking to sign Balfour to a Napoli or even Lackey like restructured deal.

vtadave
1 year 7 months ago

Why even mention Puig in a hypothetical Price deal? Not going to happen. It’s like saying that the Dodgers aren’t likely to trade Clayton Kershaw, but an offer of Bryce Harper, Stephen Strasburg, and Jordan Zimmermann might get their attention.

BlueSkyLA
BlueSkyLA
1 year 7 months ago

Slow sports news day.

johansantana15
1 year 7 months ago

Agreed. This is just irresponsibly wild speculation. Oh, while we’re at it, how about Longoria and Price to the Rangers for Profar, Darvish and Odor? Ridiculous.

Sam
1 year 7 months ago

Might?

Lefty_Orioles_Fan
Lefty_Orioles_Fan
1 year 7 months ago

If the Orioles have “health” issues with Balfour, the chances are good that Morales has something wrong with him too! The only way the Orioles get Morales is either wait till the draft is over or sign Jimenez first and then get Morales. That’s also if I understand the draft compensation rules correctly.

You know if the Orioles don’t sign Balfour and he walks, Balfour might have grounds for a grievance! I mean where is he going to find a job now. Plus, I don’t like any of the remaining free agent alternatives at all!

mattyg7
1 year 7 months ago

He doesn’t have grounds for a grievance! That’ why deals aren’t finalized until AFTER the physical, so that players don’t try to hide something. That’s why the Sox-Napoli deal almost fell through last winter. It’s not the Orioles job to worry about Balfour’s.

Lefty_Orioles_Fan
Lefty_Orioles_Fan
1 year 7 months ago

Then what about Wada?
How about Randy Wolf and his 65 Mile an Hour Fastball?
What about Morse and the Production he provided for the playoff push after the O’s acquired him?

I don’t agree with this at all! In fact, I am very discouraged by all of this!

Bleed_Orange
1 year 7 months ago

The difference was all those players were under contract when they got hurt, Balfour is not under contract currently they have only agreed to terms, and that agreement is based on him passing his physical.

Bleed_Orange
1 year 7 months ago

The way the draft pick compensation would work would be if the O’s signed Jimenez they would lose their first round pick to the Indians. If they signed Jimenez and Morales they would lose their first round pick to the Indians and their second round pick (or sandwich pick) to the Mariners. But overall I agree Morales isn’t a worth a first round pick but if Baltimore is already going to lose a pick after signing a better player losing a second round pick on Morales isn’t that bad.

Jesse Rodriguez
1 year 7 months ago

Lol Saxon just trying to get his name out there, we all know Puig for Price is impossible.

EarlyMorningBoxscore
1 year 7 months ago

I think the word you’re looking for is improbable. It’s certainly possible for a trade with both players to happen. However, it is as unlikely to happen as can be.

Jesse Rodriguez
1 year 7 months ago

To me (i know my opinion doesn’t matter) it’s impossible, I mean Puig should be untouchable, and the Dodgers don’t really need Price. As fans it will be great to see a rotation consist of Kershaw, Greinke, and Price but do the dodgers really need him?

TheRealRyan
1 year 7 months ago

I agree that this trade will not happen, but it’s not nearly as impossible or bad as you say. Right now, the Dodgers have 4 OF who project to be about 3+ WAR. They can only play 3 of them. If you assume that Price and Puig are both roughly 5 WAR players, Puig is only a 2 WAR upgrade over what you already have in house. I’m not sure who you are expecting to be the #5 SP, but he is very likely going to be worth less than 3 WAR. In that scenario, the Dodgers would actually be better off with Price in the rotation, than Puig in the OF.

Spit Ball
1 year 7 months ago

The Dodgers owe Puig 34 million over his next five years which cover his age 23-27 year old seasons and still have team control for his age 28 year old season. No way on god’s earth Price matches that value. Puig for Price straight up would make very little sense for the Dodgers. Don’t get me wrong, I think Price would be great in the National League but No…..just NO.

TheRealRyan
1 year 7 months ago

I totally agree with you. What I meant to say didn’t come out right. I meant just looking at the next 2 years, without taking any future value or player cost in to account, the Dodgers would probably be a better team with Price than Puig. You are absolutely correct about the value of the trade though. There is no way the Dodgers should or would.

mrnatewalter
mrnatewalter
1 year 7 months ago

Saxon’s been suggesting the Dodgers listen on Puig all winter… nothing new there.

John Donovan
1 year 7 months ago

Kendrys Morales had a 2.7 rWAR last season. If you sign him to a 3 year deal and he just maintains that level then you have 8.0 WAR over 3 years. In the history of the draft, the #17 overall pick has only outperformed that number in 9 of 49 cases. Sure you could strike gold and get a Roy Halladay or a Cole Hamels, but you also have an 80% chance of getting Scott Scudder or Jerry Don Gleaton or even worse. People always see a draft pick as worth a whole lot more value than it actually provides.

Spit Ball
1 year 7 months ago

Your analysis misses some points. Even if the number 17 pick rarely turns into a quality big leaguer they turn into valuable trade chips quite often. A first round pick will generally retain trade value for a couple years at least. Secondly he’s not likely to retain all of the offensive value going forward. He’s 30 and on the wrong end of the aging curve. Third he’s going to cost a team much more than a 17th overall pick. Maybe he gets 3/21 million. It could very well happen that he goes to Camden yards and hits 90 home Runs over the next three years. It’s also quite possible he signs for 3/25 and turns into the next Mike Morse. He’s big, slow afoot and suffered one ankle/foot injury that kept him out for a year and a half.

John Donovan
1 year 7 months ago

True the young player is going to have some trade value, but looking at the last 10 #17 picks there isn’t much in the way of prospects either, C.J. Cron is probably the best of the fairly mundane lot and he wouldn’t be a headliner in a big deal. You are also forgetting that Morales will have trade value at a trade deadline in years 2 and 3 of a three year deal. If he is traded he could possibly get at least one young player of that value. Plus even Mike Morse garnered three prospects in a deal last offseason. As far as his age goes, 30 is hardly over the hill, especially on a three year deal. In fact, it could be argued that 30-33 is the back half of a player’s prime.

1 year 7 months ago

Draft pick compensation rules are having an unintended, deflationary effect on the free-agency market.

tbslim
1 year 7 months ago

ya think?

Spit Ball
1 year 7 months ago

Unintended? More like undetected by the MLBPA.

BlueSkyLA
BlueSkyLA
1 year 7 months ago

More like, it is working just as intended.

Spit Ball
1 year 7 months ago

As intended by MLB and the commissioners office. The players and agents never want deflationary measures. So I would say you are 50 percent right.

BlueSkyLA
BlueSkyLA
1 year 7 months ago

The PA agreed to these changes, and it would be strange to assert that they simply didn’t understand the proposal. The players got the Qualified Offer and the elimination of automatic draft pick compensation. To say that any of this is deflationary on salaries flies in the face of the reality, which is that they are continuing to grow at a rate over 5% per year.

Spit Ball
1 year 7 months ago

You are right. Nothing about baseball salaries is deflationary right now. Morales would have been a Type A under the old agreement and Drew likely a type B because of his injuries and subpar 2012. So in theory this whole system is hurting Drew more than Morales. When you are a scratch level DH and someone offers you 14.3 million for one year you should take it.

BaMafromLa
1 year 7 months ago

Sure, the Dodgers will trade Puig for Price… if you throw in Wil Myers.

ziggy13
1 year 7 months ago

Wouldn’t trade either of those Rays players for just Puig straight up

Spit Ball
1 year 7 months ago

Price and Myers for Puig? Myers for Puig would be seen as straight up. Puig and Myers won’t be moved this offseason. Price would be lights out in the NL. The Dodgers would have to come empty the farm to do a two team trade. Pedrson, Seagar and Wheeler would land Price. A better way to do it would be to eat 40 million of Kemp’s contract to restock the farm. I could see a three team deal with Price/Hak Ju Lee to Dodgers, Kemp and 40 million to Mariners, Paxton, Miller, Zach Lee, Seagar to Rays.

BaMafromLa
1 year 7 months ago

It’s a way of saying it ain’t happening.

mhughes0379
1 year 7 months ago

Lol… There is a 0% chance that the Cubs would trade off either Baez or Bryant for a 30-year-old pitcher who’s due for an insane payday in 2 years. That was a great morning laugh though.

Bleed_Orange
1 year 7 months ago

I don’t think its impossible at all. The Cubs have a very good farm and if they think that Price will put them over the top then why not? Its not like losing one the two will gut the future of the organization. The Cubs are one of the few teams that will probably be able to afford him in 2 years and he is one the few legitimate aces in baseball.

No Baseball In Indiana
1 year 7 months ago

mhughes is 100% correct. Baez and Bryant are the #1 & #2 prospects in the Cubs system, rated as 70s by BA, and essientially MLB ready. Nobody would give up that kind of talent for a 30 year old starter. Assuming that they are only 2 WAR players (basically a notch above league average) they’d each provide $12-14 million of value in a single season, which is almost as much as Price’s arbitration raise. They’d remain cost controlled and contribute more value. Price will probably be a 4-5 WAR pitcher and require at least $25million AAV to resign.

mhughes0379
1 year 7 months ago

Absolutely, completely, and totally agree. Nice follow up, Indiana.