Cafardo On Stanton, De Aza, Porcello, Drew, Britton

In today's column, Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe wonders if Marlins star Giancarlo Stanton could wind up with the Red Sox.  Marlins GM Dan Jennings swears up and down that Stanton isn't going anywhere and even if he was for sale, Boston would be one of many clubs in pursuit.  If things suddenly changed and the Fish made Stanton available, Cafardo wonders if a package of Will Middlebrooks or Garin Cecchini plus Matt Barnes, Christian Vazquez, Jackie Bradley Jr., and Mookie Betts could get a deal done.  More from today's column:

  • The Twins have some interest in White Sox outfielder Alejandro De Aza, who is getting interest even though he's not everything a club would want in a center fielder, leadoff type.  Last season, De Aza slashed .264/.323/.405 with 17 homers in 675 plate appearances.
  • Major league sources say the Tigers are still willing to listen to offers on Rick Porcello. While he has shown promise, Detroit would like a hurler with more consistency.
  • The bidding for Ervin Santana has reportedly come down to the Orioles and Blue Jays.  Cafardo hears the Rockies were also in it for some of the day while the Phillies did their due diligence but did not appear to be in the hunt.
  • Bud Norris could be an alternative if Tommy Hunter can’t do the job as Orioles closer, but he also has trade interest and could have some appeal in the NL.  For budgetary reasons, the O's probably wouldn't go for Phillies closer Jonathan Papelbon, but it's possible if the Angelos family believes that they have a chance to win it all.
  • One Red Sox player says that he's not crying for free agent Stephen Drew.  “Why not accept a $14.1 million qualifying offer for one year?” the player said. “Is that a bad deal? That’s a lot of money. Stephen would be here playing with us by now if he’d done that.
  • Scouts are watching Orioles pitcher Zach Britton closely as he is out of options. Still only 26, Britton is still a pitcher scouts think they can salvage.  The O's are aware of his value and the interest other clubs have, but could stash him in the bullpen if they can’t get good value for him.


171 Responses to Cafardo On Stanton, De Aza, Porcello, Drew, Britton Leave a Reply

  1. Craig Foster 1 year ago

    I agree with the Red Sox player. Stop crying about the qualifying offer when you turned down $14.1 million.

    • Riaaaaaa 1 year ago

      Same, I wonder if Jonny Gomes said it. He’s sure had a lot to say lately

    • bust0ff 1 year ago

      I think the players are not getting good advice from their agents.

      • Craig Foster 1 year ago

        Maybe but who on the outside couldn’t see that players like Morales and Drew should take the qualifying offer and laugh all the way to the bank? How do players not have enough sense to see that?

        • bust0ff 1 year ago

          Scott Boras likes to bring home the big deals and I think his ego is involved.

        • bust0ff 1 year ago

          Scott Boras likes to bring home the big deals and I think his ego is involved.

        • peyton dowdy 1 year ago

          I agree on Morales and would lump Cruz in there with him but if Jhonny Peralta can get a 4 year $52mm deal I would have been sure Drew would be able to land a 3 year $27mm deal or something in that range. Morales definitely should have taken the offer Nd I thought it was absurd the Mariners were even offering it in the first place.

      • Seamaholic 1 year ago

        Drew is doing fine. If he chooses to take a one year deal, he’ll probably get something very close to the QO, so he hasn’t lost a thing. And if he waits until opening day, he’s free and clear next year. It still makes no sense for a good player to sign a QO.

        • bust0ff 1 year ago

          He is not in Spring Training seeing live pitching and working on his timing right now.

          I imagine most players would not want to be in Drew’s situation.

          • Riaaaaaa 1 year ago

            he is at boras’ camp with morales while they wait for a contract offer that most likely won’t come anytime soon

          • bust0ff 1 year ago

            Camp Boras doesn’t compare to spring training, such as it is.

          • Seamaholic 1 year ago

            Most players hate Spring Training. He’s doing just fine.

          • Shawn Baublitz 1 year ago

            He is attached to draft pick compensation until after the draft not opening day

          • peyton dowdy 1 year ago

            He is attached to draft pick compensation this year yes. But signing after opening day negates the ability to receive a qualifying offer AFTER this year.

          • rct 1 year ago

            But had he taken the QO and then gotten QO’ed again next year, he could’ve had essentially a 2 year, ~$30MM deal (the QO for next year will be even higher).

          • Mil8Ball 1 year ago

            If it was that simple everyone would sign one year deals….but its not

          • rct 1 year ago

            But had he taken the QO and then gotten QO’ed again next year, he could’ve had essentially a 2 year, ~$30MM deal (the QO for next year will be even higher).

          • Ron Loreski 1 year ago

            Regardless if they hate it or not, its 100% necessary.

          • Ron Loreski 1 year ago

            Regardless if they hate it or not, its 100% necessary.

          • bust0ff 1 year ago

            And I would rather stay home in my PJs than go to work everyday. That doesn’t make my job unnecessary and not having an employer “just fine”.

            He will miss games the longer he waits. He will either need a minor league stint or time in extended spring training, depending on when he signs.

            If he misses games, that means he makes less money.

          • bust0ff 1 year ago

            And I would rather stay home in my PJs than go to work everyday. That doesn’t make my job unnecessary and not having an employer “just fine”.

            He will miss games the longer he waits. He will either need a minor league stint or time in extended spring training, depending on when he signs.

            If he misses games, that means he makes less money.

          • peyton dowdy 1 year ago

            That didn’t seem to hurt Lohse last year when he signed late.

          • bust0ff 1 year ago

            Good point. I think the market may be different this year. Do you think Drew will do better than the QO?

          • peyton dowdy 1 year ago

            I honestly didn’t think Drew was going to have this hard of a time. I thought he was a safe bet for a 2 year $20mm or 3 year $27-30mm deal. Especially after Peralta’s contract. I don’t know if he will beat it or not but I still think a 2 year $20mm deal could happen. I still think the Blue Jays are going to land Santana and if that happens then they sign Drew to play 2nd base. The Jays have 2 protected first round pics. If they really fancy themselves contenders they need to upgrade 2nd base still. I do agree with you that the market has been a bit different this year though.

          • bust0ff 1 year ago

            The time and place for Drew to practice at 2nd base is Spring Training. It needs to happen soon for it to work and the Jays don’t seem to be in a hurry to make it happen.

          • toddcoffeytime 1 year ago

            But it did hurt him! Look at his monthly splits, Lohse really struggled early on in the year…

        • Damon Bowman 1 year ago

          He’s got no shot at landing a near-QO one year deal for ’14 unless something freaky happens. Right now Drew will be lucky to sign anything beyond a one year deal for more than $10 mil. Many reports tell us that he’s had better offers in terms of years but the facts are that he’s not a QO-worthy player. His bat is inconsistent, he’s had injury troubles, and he’s on the wrong side of 30.

          • TheRealRyan 1 year ago

            I’m not saying you’re wrong, but it is crazy to think that Drew can’t get more than $10 mil on a 1 year deal. He signed a 1/$9.5 million deal last year when he was coming off a terrible 2012 season where he struggled coming back from that horrific ankle injury. Last year, he had 500 PA and was one of the top SS in all of baseball and he can’t get a better contract?

          • calamityfrancis 1 year ago

            but how many teams have a real need right now at SS that realistically have the money to sign him? the mets, maybe?

          • TheRealRyan 1 year ago

            I would also think the Twins should be an option. They seem to have the money, no long term answer at SS and Florimon isn’t really that good. I think he would be better suited as a defensive util IF rather than starter.

          • Steve_in_MA 1 year ago

            All the more reason he should have accepted a $14.1MM QO and played. Do you realize that after taxes and some swanky level living expenses, the QO would have resulted in $7MM in the bank? That guarantees Drew could have a $280K annual income for life, without ever touching the principal. And all for just playing baseball for one year. The QO is life-altering money. No one should be shedding any tears for Drew’s predicament.

    • Mil8Ball 1 year ago

      They should have made a two tier system and have a way to decide if they are Type A vs. Type B…pretty much like the old system, but you offer A’s 14mil and B’s 7mil. Then have it where Type A free agents are worth a first rounder and Type B free agents a 2nd rounder.

      A system like this would make it the same for your elite players like Cano, while also helping lesser players that are still good get a long term deal….but still rewarding teams for losing a good player. Its a win-win scenario that helps everyone.

      (Pretty identicle to the old system, but with little differences. The old system was so much better)

      Also I would mind the QO being abolished and just rewarding a team with a draft pick for good enough players.

      • Craig Foster 1 year ago

        I don’t think so. You refuse the qualifying offer you deal with the consequences. It’s not like the qualifying offer isn’t fair.

        • Mil8Ball 1 year ago

          It isn’t fair for a player to be forced to go into FA with a 1st round draft pick attached to him just because he is worth more than 14mil. Players should not be losing millions of dollars because they are good and want to leave their current team.

          Some players like Morales or Cruz should have taken it, but Santana and Drew should be finding long term deals worth 10mil a year.

          • rct 1 year ago

            But the thing is, Drew turned down $14.1MM. A ‘long term deal worth 10mil’ would be like 4 years, $40MM. Had Drew taken the QO, he’d be a free agent next year and would only need a 3 year, $25.9MM deal to match that. He should’ve taken the QO.

          • Mil8Ball 1 year ago

            No I consider 3/30mil a long term contract. Something he is worth, but draft pick attachment gives him not chance apparently.

            Kyle Lohse made a good point saying draft pick attachment takes your suitors from 30 to 5 just because of that. Less suitors and less competition doesn’t go well with these players.

          • toddcoffeytime 1 year ago

            Unless he gets hurt/underperforms…then he gets his 14.1 MM and a whole lot of nothing next year. Players (rightfully) always want the security of a long term deal.

        • Mil8Ball 1 year ago

          It isn’t fair for a player to be forced to go into FA with a 1st round draft pick attached to him just because he is worth more than 14mil. Players should not be losing millions of dollars because they are good and want to leave their current team.

          Some players like Morales or Cruz should have taken it, but Santana and Drew should be finding long term deals worth 10mil a year.

        • Damon Bowman 1 year ago

          I don’t think there’s any debate that the system is somewhat reasonable. However, when players like Drew and Morales are attached to the exact same draft pick compensation as a Cano it shows the obvious imbalance in the system. Down the road there should be tiers of player compensation to properly equate the player being lost to his value on the market.

          • Steve_in_MA 1 year ago

            That’s the system we just got rid of. Tiers A and B.

    • Karkat 1 year ago

      Of the players who are or have been stuck in “QO-limbo” this offseason, Ervin Santana is the only one with legitimate gripes. Morales, Drew, and Cruz all had no business turning down such a deal.

      • toddcoffeytime 1 year ago

        When Johnny Peralta is getting 4 years and over 50 million dollars coming off a PED suspension…I’d say Drew is worth more than the QO. He’s probably not worth quite as much as Peralta, but a SS who can defend AND hit is worth 10+ Million a year over 3-4 years in this market.

  2. Riaaaaaa 1 year ago

    I know its just speculation but I personally wouldn’t trade all those prospects for Stanton.

    • johnsilver 1 year ago

      They get 4 MLB starters within 2 seasons (figuring Betts works out) and a possible starter later on this year out of Barnes. Even worse if they got Cecchini over Middlebrooks.

      A Terrible deal for Boston. Boston is already moving Betts around the diamond to get him reps at SS and talking about him moving to the OF so they have a future spot for him.

      • NoNames7225 1 year ago

        “They get 4 MLB starters within 2 seasons”

        How do you know those players are gonna be MLB starters within 2 seasons?

      • AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

        That’s not a terrible deal for Boston. That’s an “okay” deal for Miami. None of those guys are premier prospects. The best player in that deal (Middlebrooks) is older than Stanton. Come to think of it, Stanton is basically the same age as everyone in that deal except Betts.

        Here’s the BA rankings for those guys:
        JBJ #50
        Cecchini #74
        Betts #75
        Barnes unranked
        Vasquez unranked

        So the “best” prospect in that deal is Bradley Jr who’s essentially a defense first player who could lead off with some speed and a good OBP. That’s basically Denard Span Pt II. And he’s just months younger than Stanton.

        That deal is a quantity with some quality deal. It’s very much a “I’ll give you some good prospects but I don’t want to give up a whole bunch of good prospects and pay market value.”

        Why no Owens? No Swihart? No Ball (can’t be traded just yet)?

        A better trade would Owens + Cecchini + Swihart + Ball (after the draft) and that’s still just an okay deal as none of those guys are elite prospects.

        Stanton basically projects as a 4-6 win player the next 5 years and is still 3-4 years away from his theoretical peak. Boston has the parts to get him, but if he does go on the block they’ll easily be outbid if that was their best offer.

        • johnsilver 1 year ago

          Worst player in that deal is WMB. Miami makes that deal for the future, they are not winning now, but maybe have a chance when Eovaldi, Fernandez, Alvarez, Turner,Ozuna, Yelich fully develop.

          What Boston is sending them is top notch kids, not run of the mill players. Cecchini led ALL of MiLB players for instance in .OBP last year at .420 for the uninformed. WMB is a hacker.

          Vazquez has had POP times in the 1.7 range and threw out 48% of baserunners last season. Barnes was ranked the last 2 years and was an “honorable mention” for BA this year. He’ll be in MLB this year, especially on a team like the Marlins and throws 95-98mph…

          Betts? Might want to check his numbers out before dismissing him as well. Stanton isn’t going to win anything with the marlins and Boston shouldn’t sacrifice 4 future position players they need, they SHOULD trade the marlins the hacker WMB though, for anything.

          • AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

            It doesn’t matter when they are or aren’t winning. That doesn’t mean they have to settle for an okay deal for Stanton when there would easily be better deals out there.

            I’m not down playing any of the guys mentioned, but simply saying that Stanton is an elite talent and that collection of players is an okay deal for a player of Stantons caliber.

            While future value is important, saying “four future position players” doesn’t mean anything if those four guys combined might not even equal Stanton’s win value. It’s better to have one 6 win player than four players who add up to 6 wins.

            Those aren’t top notch kids. Top notch kids are Xander Bogaerts, Byron Buxton, Oscar Taveras etc… That’s what you would have to trade for a Stanton like player. I’m not saying Boston should trade Bogaerts, but if they want him they’ll need to build a better package than a handful of bottom half Top 100 guys and two of them essentially bottom 25.

            Top 100 prospects are nice but there are clearly tiers there and they are also just prospects.

          • johnsilver 1 year ago

            “Those aren’t top notch kids. Top notch kids are Xander Bogaerts, Byron
            Buxton, Oscar Taveras etc… That’s what you would have to trade for a
            Stanton like player.”

            Days of trading those types (franchise) of players for a Stanton are over and done with. You will NEVER see it again, or not in the foreseeable future. Teams now will be drafting talent, or paying through the nose via FA for talent like a Stanton.

            Edit:

            I should say the 1st 2, I am not that up on Taveras, other than he’s a talented player. I want to see how he does in a non offensive oriented league.

          • AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

            Just wait until Stanton is traded and reevaluate your comment.

          • AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

            Just wait until Stanton is traded and reevaluate your comment.

          • Matt Armstrong 1 year ago

            Does Wil Myers for James Shields not come to mind?

        • peyton dowdy 1 year ago

          In the Marlins case it isn’t about Stanton’s age it’s about cost and controllability. Stanton is going to get very expensive very soon and the players in that trade package fill multiple positions on the cheap for several seasons.

          • AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

            That’s not the point of the Stanton trade. Filling holes cheaply isn’t the point of any trade. It’s about getting the best talent available for Stanton. The Marlins don’t need or want guys to fill holes. They need and want high-level players that a Stanton package should return. If they wanted to just fill holes cheaply then they could sign multiple free agents to minor league deals or promote from within.

            They are trading Stanton to build for the future and any package for Stanton should yield high caliber players or at least one elite prospect. Something the Red Sox don’t have outside of XB right now.

            They aren’t just going to move Stanton to clear payroll when they’ve got the most available payroll theoretically than any other team in the majors.

            When they trade Stanton it’ll be for more than just guys who can fill multiple positions on the cheap.

          • peyton dowdy 1 year ago

            You can’t find minor league free agents with the talent of JBJ, Betts, Barnes or Cechinni. The group of players being discussed by Cafardo should all work out to be at least average major leaguers. 5 guys putting up 8-10 WAR a year for roughly $3mm combined is greater than 1 guy putting up 4 WAR per year and making twice as much as the group of young players. You just don’t seem to view the Red Sox minor leaguers in the same light I do. I view each one of those guys as a projected major league regular. You obviously do not so we can just agree to disagree there.

          • TheRealRyan 1 year ago

            There is no way you can say these guys are all at least average major leaguers. Comparing these guys to similar ranked players in the past shows that there is about a 1/3 chance that none of the four become average players and less than a 1 percent chance that all four become average players. You are way, way overrating these prospects. I don’t know if it is because you are a Red Sox fan or just overly optimistic when it comes to prospects, but prospects fail way more often than you are thinking.

    • John Cate 1 year ago

      Agreed. That would be an utterly stupid trade for Boston to make.

      • TheRealRyan 1 year ago

        As a Rays fan, I hope you are right. I definitely do not want Boston making this trade at all.

  3. connfyoozed . 1 year ago

    Zach Britton could be a really good pickup for a team trying to develop a younger starting rotation. And if the Orioles sign Ervin Santana, Britton’s worth to the Orioles takes a big hit.

  4. Lefty_Orioles_Fan 1 year ago

    Who do the Red Sox have in the ‘Barn’ that would interest the Marlins?
    I don’t see it.
    I can’t see the Orioles trading for Papelbon, unless the Phillies pay his entire salary
    and even then, I can’t see it.
    Danny Farquhar from the Mariners is someone I would consider.
    Lastly, the O’s better not trade Britton, I am hoping the O’s salvage his career rather that seeing someone else salvage it.

    PS I am really not all that interested in Ervin Santana. I mean maybe for 6 million and 2 million in incentives. This silliness of giving him 13 to 14 million is just plain silliness!
    I mean the guy is almost a month late to spring training. Even if he signs today would he be ready to go for the 1st week of baseball?

    • colin 1 year ago

      Well lets see, the Red Sox have the #2 ranked farm system in all of baseball, meaning there are plenty of players in the “barn” that would interest the Marlins. What a comment filled with “Sillyness!!!” that you made. I wouldn’t even give up that package for Stanton in the first place. Vasquez has been crushing in spring training and also has the best arm of any catching prospect in the game( being mentored by the Molina brothers will help that happen) . And you being an O’s fan should be praying that Santana chooses to pitch for your team. You need every bit of help you can get in the AL East.

      • AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

        Stop. Vasquez does NOT have the best arm. That conversation begins and ends with Austin Hedges, Christian Bethancourt, and Jorge Alfaro then there’s everyone else.

        • johnsilver 1 year ago

          Vazquez, Vazquez…

          Edit:

          It will be interesting to see the “battle” begin when Pierzynski’s contract expires after this year and he (Vazquez) gets a chance to show it off on the mlb scene.

          • AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

            Let me just settle this for us. Go to Baseball Prospectus and search for Top Tool Catcher Defense/Arm. Never mind, I’ll just tell you who it is.

            Winner: Christian Bethancourt.

            Others Considered: Jorge Alfaro (Texas Rangers), Austin Hedges (San Diego Padres), Francisco Mejia (Cleveland Indians), Stryker Trahan (Arizona Diamondbacks), Christian Vasquez (Boston Red Sox), Justin O’Conner (Tampa Bay Rays)

            So Vasquez was an honorable mention, but Bethancourt has an 80 grade cannon.

    • Dylan Griffin 1 year ago

      Uh, Red Sox have like 9 players in MLB’s top 100 prospect rankings, most of any team. If the Marlins were to shop Giancarlo, how would that not interest them? Just say Xander and Marlins would instantly be on the phone, but obviously that’s out of the question. I don’t think the Red Sox will go after Giancarlo anyways, because they value their prospects very highly and there’s no chance they would give up a package like that for Giancarlo.

      • colin 1 year ago

        Sox are set up for success for a long time with that farm, no shot they deplete the whole thing for ONE player that had a 2.3 WAR last year and seems to be a bit injury prone already.

      • Seamaholic 1 year ago

        Not saying the Sox don’t have a good farm, but a lot of that “9 players in MLB’s top 100″ is just typical Red Sox hype. If Marlins trade Stanton to them, there’s no way Bogaerts isn’t part of the return, unless one of the other 8 turns into a monster this year.

        • Dylan Griffin 1 year ago

          Bogaerts alone is more valuable than Stanton.

          • colin 1 year ago

            It actually isn’t typical Red Sox hype. Kieth Law wrote the story on the top farm systems and if i recall he is a die hard New York Yankees fan. Were did NY fall on that list? Right near the very bottom.

          • AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

            Bogaerts has had 50 PA’s in the major leagues and put up 0.2 wins. Stanton has 2000 PA’s and put up 13 wins.

            Bogaerts projects to be a 5 win player 3-4 years from now. Stanton projects to be a 6 win player FOR THE NEXT 5 years.

            Bogaerts is an elite prospect, but he’s not on the level of a player who’s hit 115 home runs by age 23. Something Bogaerts won’t do unless he hits 38 home runs over the next 3 seasons.

  5. Drew 1 year ago

    Stanton is the RF the Mariners need to bat behind Cano. Marlins should work out a trade with the M’s b/c they have the resources to offer a dang good haul for the Marlins, and it gives the M’s the RH bat they need.

  6. Matt Mosher 1 year ago

    Its not even remotely fair. Nowhere near enough.

    • Dylan Griffin 1 year ago

      And you’re saying Bogaerts, Swihart, and Owens for Stanton is fair? Bogaerts alone is more valuable than Stanton. Get real man. And that proposal had 5 prospects that is in MLBs top 100 prospects list, and that isn’t fair enough?

      • Mil8Ball 1 year ago

        Bogaerts has proved nothing, all potential at this point. If I’m the Red Sox I’m doing a straight up one for one trade like that any day of the week. 3 years of Stanton for just one unproven prospect is a steal. There farm is so deep that it wouldnt hurt very much. Then resign Drew and you’ve got a really good situation.

        However the value of the two is pretty close. I think you would find a handful of GMs saying yes and some saying no.

        You also have to ask yourself if you are in a world series window? Obviously the Red Sox are and they have a really good chance. Trading a huge question mark for Stanton is a pretty wise idea for a team like the Red Sox.

        You can have your opinion and think its crazy, but it isn’t and may just be a really good idea for the Sox.

        • John Murray 1 year ago

          I don’t think there’s a snowball’s chance that the Sox trade Bogaerts for anyone. The fact that Bogaerts played well in a playoff run means his prognosis is strong. Doesn’t really matter what any GM apart from Cherington thinks, and Stanton isn’t a big need for the Sox because their only real outfield need is in center, and Stanton doesn’t fit that bill.

  7. Lilstackhustla 1 year ago

    If the asking price for Porcello is anything like what they got for Fister plenty of teams should be interested.

  8. dc21892 1 year ago

    Stanton to Boston for that package makes no sense for Boston. They should hold on to them.

    • Dylan Griffin 1 year ago

      Yeah, no chance they will go after Stanton. They would balk at that package. Cherington loves his prospects more than anything.

    • Dylan Griffin 1 year ago

      Yeah, no chance they will go after Stanton. They would balk at that package. Cherington loves his prospects more than anything.

  9. Tigers72 1 year ago

    So what could the Tigers get for Porcello? They would need to give up some more pieces like one of the J Tompsons to get a better pitcher.

    • Seamaholic 1 year ago

      Well, they’d have to get a SP, because otherwise they don’t have enough to field a rotation … Should of thought of this before they traded Fister.

  10. Tigers72 1 year ago

    I don’t see the Red Sox getting Stanton unless they overpay because of that spring game where they played all minor leaguers.

  11. Andrew_Jackson_Pollock 1 year ago

    Ahh…yes…the always brave quote from a player to cowardly to attach his name to it.

    Although I’ve always wondered what percentage of quotes from unnamed sources are actually real vs. made up by writers to make their stories more interesting.

  12. Andrew_Jackson_Pollock 1 year ago

    Ahh…yes…the always brave quote from a player to cowardly to attach his name to it.

    Although I’ve always wondered what percentage of quotes from unnamed sources are actually real vs. made up by writers to make their stories more interesting.

  13. northsfbay 1 year ago

    It has been stated many times, Stanton is not for trade.

    • colin 1 year ago

      ANYONE is up for trade for the right price. Want Mike Trout? I am sure he is available if you want to give up 2 aces, a couple all star position players, about 5 of your top prospects, and then some draft picks. What is stated usually is not what is done.

      • start_wearing_purple 1 year ago

        Mike Trout might actually be the exception to the rule.

      • NoNames7225 1 year ago

        Of course, the “right price” is probably/usually a steep price

      • NoNames7225 1 year ago

        Of course, the “right price” is probably/usually a steep price

      • NRD1138 1 year ago

        Trout will only be available if they cannot resign him to a decent deal. As they have him under their control for some time I doubt Trout would go anywhere

      • JCurrie39 1 year ago

        You can’t trade picks (not trying to be a CBA nazi) but if you were to offer the Angles Three top prospects and take on Pujols and Hamiltons salary then you may have a deal.

        • colin 1 year ago

          I know realistically that will never happen I was just making a point no one is untouchable.

          • JCurrie39 1 year ago

            I know, I’ve always wondered if LAA would take a Hypothetical (.01% chance of happening) a deal which would send Trout, Josh Hamilton and Albert to the Redsox for JB jr and will middlebrooks?

          • colin 1 year ago

            Cherrington would choke if he heard that. He clearly is not a fan of those big time contracts. Without those contracts sure I am sure he would love to lol

          • AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

            What? Bad contracts doesn’t = Trout. You can’t just say “Ill give you my worst two contracts and the best player in baseball for two of yours guys.”

  14. NoNames7225 1 year ago

    Cafardo: Red Sox are playing the Marlins… gotta write about something… I got an idea! I’ll microwave some Stanton trade rumors!

    • GMwannabe 1 year ago

      its not a rumor.. he never said he heard it was talked about.. he simply asked if that was a fair offer.. chill out

      • NoNames7225 1 year ago

        “its not a rumor”

        Alright then, speculation (and he’s gotten good mileage out of Stanton’s name in that regard)

        “he simply asked if that was a fair offer”

        Well, to answer his question… no, it’s not.

        • colin 1 year ago

          Exactly, not fair at all, the Marlins would need to give up more then a player with ONE great year under his belt for that group of prospects.

          • NoNames7225 1 year ago

            Prospects are just that… prospects.

        • GMwannabe 1 year ago

          in your opinion..

          • AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

            It’s not an opinion it’s a fact. Stanton’s one “good” season has provided more value than all of those players careers combined.

          • GMwannabe 1 year ago

            again.. in your opinion.. by that logic no veteran player should ever be traded for prospects but regardless of whether or not Miami would make that deal, that’s a solid package of young, cost controled talent

  15. John Murray 1 year ago

    That’s way too much for Stanton anyway – I could possibly see Betts, Vazquez and Middlebrooks, but not Barnes or Bradley – they’re long term parts of the Sox future. I’m not at all fussy on us dealing Betts at this stage though, either…especially for a guy like Stanton, who’s not a 5 tool guy. Not only that – Stanton’s only under team control until 2016, and he’s going to cost the team who gets him nine figures and longer than 5 years, so the Sox are going to mortgage their future for a three-year rental? Ben Cherington watched what happened when Theo Epstein bought Crawford and Gonzalez, and I’ve got doubts he’d make that same mistake.

    • KJ4realz 1 year ago

      That is ridiculous. The only ‘tool’ Stanton lacks is speed. He’s a plus everywhere else. Only available until after 2016? That’s still 3 years of control and 2 if he’s had at the end of this season.

      He’s young, cheap, cost controlled, and a top player in the game. He’s going to cost a boatload.

      • JSapp11 1 year ago

        You see what the cubs got for 2 months of garza… The price for Stanton will be sky high. Even following injury concerns and a down year.

      • frogbogg 1 year ago

        Tampa couldn’t get 1 elite prospect for 2 years of Price. Cost controlled above average young players Are worth more than high paid players like Price and Stanton.

        Seattle should have traded Walker for price. Tampa FINALLY would have been on the wrong side of a trade. I.e Walkers shoulder problem.

        • TheRealRyan 1 year ago

          How do you know that Tampa couldn’t get 1 elite prospect for Price? The only trade proposal I heard that included names was the Rays asking Cleveland for Santana, Salazar and Lindor. That sounds like the Rays were asking for elite prospects plus elite players. That could be why no deal materialized.

      • John Murray 1 year ago

        He’s a career ,265 hitter with practically as many career errors as outfield assists, and as you’ve acknowledged, he isn’t speedy. Whether you think so or not, that makes him, at best, only an elite player at two of the tools.

        If you want a player comparison to what Stanton looks like right now? Mark Teixeira, without the fielding upside.

        Three years of control is fine, except when you aren’t going to be interested in extending him. The real way that Stanton will “cost a boatload” is when he negotiates his first FA contract, because a team like the Yankees will likely come along and offer him a nine-figure contract that starts with a 2. The Red Sox have already made it clear that they’re not interested in mortgaging their long-term future for short or long term rentals. What Cafardo suggests is giving away no less then three top 100 prospects and a starting player. Two years of James Shields cost considerably less than that, and the consensus among all GMs is that the Royals overpaid – significantly.

        • TheRealRyan 1 year ago

          A comparison to the Shields trade would be Bogaerts, Webster, Margot and Diaz. Would you trade the package above for the one Cafardo proposed?

          Also, a 24 yo Stanton with 3 years of control has much more value now than a then 31 yo Shields with 2 years of control did last year. A realistic trade package for Stanton would most likely have you adding to the one I mentioned above.

          Remember this saying, if you as a fan are OK with your teams side, you haven’t added enough.

          • John Murray 1 year ago

            My own feeling – Shields went for way too much and was evidence of a small market team deciding it had a small window in which to contend, and decided to overpay significantly in order to take advantage of that window. The Red Sox have one of the three best farm systems in baseball, are coming off a world championship and have as much readymade talent as anyone…so they feel no pressure to make a lopsided deal like KC did.

            Cafardo simply loves Stanton and wants him. I can’t see, for one second, the Red Sox wanting to surrender a significant part of their farm system for a 2-tool outfielder, no matter how good the power is. The best offense in baseball doesn’t need him.

            And as for being OK with my team’s side – I can’t see any team in baseball, save for the Cardinals, who have even close to the depth the Sox have. Maybe it sounds arrogant, I don’t know and don’t particularly care. All I know is, the Sox seem to be mounds deeper than anyone on guys 26 through 40 on the 40-man roster. So why give that depth away when our present corner outfielders are pretty good already?

  16. burnboll 1 year ago

    I also wonder if Stanton will be traded. Have no opinion really on most likely landing spot. But Stanton would definitely play well in the hitting friendly AL East.

    If Marlins are serious about keeping Stanton, they should move in their fences significantly.

  17. Bill Smith 1 year ago

    “Major league sources”….that tells me all I need to know. It’s fairly apparent that one of Detroit’s division rivals put this “rumor” out there, knowing full well that now Detroit, and Porcello himself, will face a plethora of questions and interrogations about impending trades. Hogwash.

  18. Bill Smith 1 year ago

    “Major league sources”….that tells me all I need to know. It’s fairly apparent that one of Detroit’s division rivals put this “rumor” out there, knowing full well that now Detroit, and Porcello himself, will face a plethora of questions and interrogations about impending trades. Hogwash.

  19. NRD1138 1 year ago

    De Aza had no concentration last season and got picked off of bases numerous times, and even third a few times if I am not mistaken. Also had trouble making good decisions on the base paths (though some of that I chalk up to McEwing who I have no confidence in as a 3rd base coach). if the Twins want him then fine. The only thing I would be worried about is him ‘waking up’ and playing lights out for the Twins, a division rival.

  20. John Cate 1 year ago

    That offer from the Red Sox might get the deal done, but there’s no way on this planet that I’d offer that kind of package for Stanton. As good as Stanton is, he’s a one-dimensional player. He’s a bat. He doesn’t do anything else to help a team win. The Red Sox don’t need to make lopsided deals to acquire one-dimensional players, even really good one-dimensional players. You’d have to be offering Mike Trout or Andrew McCutchen before I’d even consider a five-for-one deal like that. Making it for Stanton would be stupid.

    • cjr45 1 year ago

      Stanton was injured last year it hurt his defense somewhat he is not one dimensional

      • John Cate 1 year ago

        He’s an outfielder, with a slightly above average arm and no speed. He’s nothing special with the glove even if he’s 100 percent healthy. He’s an average baserunner with no speed, and when he gets older and a step slower, he’ll probably need to move to first or DH. All he does well is swing the bat. Every other skill he has is ordinary or below, and he’s injury-prone to boot.

        • KJ4realz 1 year ago

          You realize that you can be ‘one dimensional’ and still be a great player? And I’m sorry, but Stanton is not a one dimensional player. The only tool that you can basically say he doesn’t have a case to be at least average in is speed.

          Can’t believe how undervalued this guys is getting

          • John Cate 1 year ago

            Sure, you can be on one-dimensional and still be a great player. Miguel Cabrera, for example. Can’t run, can’t field anywhere, but can hit .330 with 40 home runs. Stanton doesn’t hit anywhere near .330 and can’t stay healthy long enough to hit 40 home runs. When he stops spending a third of the season on the DL and raises his batting average about 60 points, then we’ll talk about him being a great player. And seriously discuss why the Boston Red Sox might trade five top prospects to acquire him.

          • Spit Ball 1 year ago

            Thank you for Clarifying that for people. Remember the package for Adrian Gonzalez was Rizzo, Kelly, Fuentes? I think a similar package to that would be fair for Stanton. A top position prospect, a top pitching prospect and a toolsy young outfielder. Maybe even throw in a lower tier arm. Cechinni/Middlebrooks, Barnes, Manuel Margot and Ruby de LaRosa. That would be fair.

          • Spit Ball 1 year ago

            Given a 6 year extension!

          • TheRealRyan 1 year ago

            Except that Gonzalez was 29 and had one year left on his contract. Stanton is 24 and has 3 years left on his. That would mean Stanton is 3 times as valuable as Gonzalez was at that time. Kelly was also a top 35 prospect, which is higher ranked than any of the guys you mentioned. Not a real good trade comparison.

        • Mil8Ball 1 year ago

          When he gets older? He is 24! You are talking 7+Years into the future atleast! Way past the 3 years of control he has now and what a team is trading for.

          • John Cate 1 year ago

            Do you honestly think the Red Sox would trade five top prospects for a guy and not sign him to an extension? They’re not dumb. If they made a deal like that, it would be on the same terms that they traded for Adrian Gonzalez. They only made the deal because they’d agreed to terms with A-Gon on a long-term deal. So yes, Stanton’s value going forward beyond his arbitration years DOES factor into the equation.

          • Mil8Ball 1 year ago

            I stopped reading after a sentence because I never said they would…

            And reading the rest no his age still doesn’t matter even if he did have to agree to an extension because if a trade were to happen right now it would be for 6 years. Stanton would want to become a FA at 30.

          • John Cate 1 year ago

            The vast majority of baseball players lose their speed at a dramatic rate after the age of 25. It’s one of the first things to decline, even if a player is still advancing his skills in other areas. Stanton is 24 now. Odds are, if he’s still playing the outfield in five years, he’ll be a statue out there. He already had a -9.9 UZR/150 in 2013. If he loses a step, he’s bad. If he loses two, he’s Adam Dunn.

          • TheRealRyan 1 year ago

            Gonzalez was traded in December of 2010 and signed his extension in April 2011. If you look back at the articles at the time of the trade, it specifically says that no extension was reached between Gonzalez and Boston at the time of the trade after extension talks broke off.

  21. GMwannabe 1 year ago

    Those are 5 very good prospects and would be considered elite for a lot of teams. Why should the Red Sox (or anyone) have to give their #1 prospect in a potential package where in some instances guys who are their 3-5 best prospect would be #1-2 on other teams.
    Teams with top tier farm systems can put a package together without using their top 1-2 prospects that are still better packages then other teams simply because they have better systems

  22. dshires4 1 year ago

    The proposed package of Middlebrooks or Cecchini + scrubs (aside from Bradley Jr.) is laughable. Cafardo needs to take off the cheerleaders outfit when it comes to trade suggestions. That would get the Red Sox laughed out of the conversation.

    • John Cate 1 year ago

      Betts and Barnes are grade-A prospects. It’s lopsided all right–in favor of the Marlins.

      • dshires4 1 year ago

        Barnes has pitched all of 5 innings in AAA. And Betts hasn’t even sniffed AA yet. Grades mean nothing. They’re arbitrary. What isn’t arbitrary is that Stanton is a proven commodity, with absurd potential, still under team control for a couple more seasons. His value is much higher than a couple guys who might or might not ever reach the majors. You’re looking at Xander + Bradley Jr, if Cafardo was realistic.

  23. peyton dowdy 1 year ago

    If the Tigers wanted a pitcher more consistent than Porcello. Why did they trade Fister in the first place? The price difference in the two wasn’t enough to trade Fister. Especially when the package they got back for him was about what someone would have expected for Porcello in the first place. I still don’t get what Dombrowski was doing on that one.

  24. Cyyoung 1 year ago

    Wow, Carfardo. Posters on this site are better. That’s the truth.

  25. Sufferfortribe 1 year ago

    Have to agree with the Red Sox player talking about QO’s. $14.1MM really IS a lot of money. How many of us would like to earn that much in one year? And c’mon, how much do you really need to live on? Considering how much Drew has already made in his career($30,400,000), the QO seems like it should have been a no-brainer.

    • TheRealRyan 1 year ago

      Drew signed for 1/9.5 after a terrible season, struggling to come back from a horrific ankle injury last off season. Why would a 1/14 be a no brainer after he had 500 PA and was one of the top SS in baseball last year?

  26. Spit Ball 1 year ago

    That trade proposal by Cafardo for Stanton is a horrible idea. Talk about gutting your farm system!

  27. Steve_in_MA 1 year ago

    Cafardo is willing to give up 5 top organizational prospects, three of which are in the Top 100, and a fourth who probably will be Top 100 next year, for a guy who is a mere +3 WAR player? Some people are just transfixed by power hitting. Stanton is a one-trick pony. Thank the Lord Nick is a writer and not a GM.

    • Zac 1 year ago

      I completely agree, one big bat won’t make any team into a contender (ex. Angels and many other teams who bring in big bat type free agents). 1 or 2 positional starters this year (JBJ and possibly WMB if they want him over Cecchini), 2-3 potential future starters in (Betts, Vasquez, and Cecchini if they choose him over WMB) to go a long with 1 of our biggest pitching prospects would be an absolute steal for Miami. Lets say they go with WMB instead of Cecchini, they would be getting 2 starters this year to go a long with 3 very good prospects who are close to Major League ready with Betts the longest away but has the highest upside. Stay the course, build your farm system like the cardinals have done over the years and championships will come.

  28. Riaaaaaa 1 year ago

    this comment just made me angry.

  29. Riaaaaaa 1 year ago

    this comment just made me angry.

  30. Dylan Griffin 1 year ago

    5 prospects in MLBs top 100 prospects are not “quality pieces”? lol. And you’re really putting Bogaerts name in the conversation? lol

  31. Dylan Griffin 1 year ago

    5 prospects in MLBs top 100 prospects are not “quality pieces”? lol. And you’re really putting Bogaerts name in the conversation? lol

  32. Matt Mosher 1 year ago

    Stud prospects? Haha! Its a typical proposal where Team A keeps all its top 2 or 3 prospects and Team B gives up its best player for a package of good prospects. Not going to happen.

  33. Matt Mosher 1 year ago

    Absolutely. How do you acquire a bat like Stanton without giving up Bogaerts? Or are you living in a Beantown dreamworld where Boston is the only team interested in Stanton?

  34. NoNames7225 1 year ago

    Making a top 100 prospect list doesn’t guarantee Major League success.

  35. Dylan Griffin 1 year ago

    I’ve said this a few times already on here, but Bogaerts alone is more valuable than Stanton. Let alone in a package with Owens and Swihart. Bogaerts has MVP potential. Better bat and better defensively, also at a premium spot at SS. Stanton already has long term health issues.

  36. TheRealRyan 1 year ago

    I get that everyone in Boston is excited for Bogaerts, and should be, but stop with this crazy talk. An unproven prospect is not more valuable than an MLB player who entering his age 24 season already has over a 100 HR and a career .889 OPS. He has averaged about 4 WAR/season since he has become a MLB player. As good as Bogaerts is, there is a good chance he never has a 4 WAR season, ever.

  37. Mil8Ball 1 year ago

    MVP potential? Bogaerts has a better bat?

    I’m shocked after 70 MLB at bats you found out so much. And sorry to break it to you but Stanton is much more likely to win an MVP award. Bogaerts has literally nothing at this point that makes me think he could win the MVP award. He is average on defense, average power at best, and is not very fast. He has little makings of what they look for in an MVP player.

    There is no way Bogaerts ever sniffs that award.

  38. jjs91 1 year ago

    “I’ve said this a few times already on here, but Bogaerts alone is more valuable than Stanton.”

    You can keep saying it, but it doesn’t make the statement any truer.

  39. jjs91 1 year ago

    “I’ve said this a few times already on here, but Bogaerts alone is more valuable than Stanton.”

    You can keep saying it, but it doesn’t make the statement any truer.

  40. colin 1 year ago

    Boggy – 1 ring
    Stanton – 0 rings

    In a couple years he will be playing for a real organization hopefully.

  41. NoNames7225 1 year ago

    So Taguichi – 2
    Greg Dobbs -1
    “Boggy” -1

  42. NoNames7225 1 year ago

    So Taguichi – 2
    Greg Dobbs -1
    “Boggy” -1

  43. John Cate 1 year ago

    There’s an equally good chance that he will have about 10 of them. As good a chance as that of Stanton continuing to get hurt and not consistently delivering his potential.

  44. colin 1 year ago

    Averaged a 4 WAR/season? Were do you see that?
    2010- 2.3
    2011- 3.2
    2012- 5.7
    2013- 2.3

    That doesn’t look like an average of 4 wins a season to me? Maybe I am doing the math wrong though.

  45. colin 1 year ago

    What has Stanton guaranteed? Besides having one great year?

  46. colin 1 year ago

    2010- 2.3
    2011- 3.2
    2012- 5.7
    2013- 2.3

    Can you name the player behind those WAR numbers Allen? Go ahead type it out for me….. Gian……..

  47. colin 1 year ago

    Point made , was just saying, that kid was 20 years old and came through in the brightest stage there is. Stanton hasn’t had an opportunity to show that yet, not his fault I guess.

  48. NoNames7225 1 year ago

    There are no guarantees about Stanton’s future (just like there are no guarantees regarding any prospect moving forward.

    But what has been proven is that Stanton is a great player capable of much more. Prospects are just that.. prospects

  49. Allen McCabe 1 year ago

    He averages over 3 WAR a year and has hit 100 homers before he’s 25. He *guarantees* a LOT more than a totally unproven prospects with 17 major league plate appearances. Unless you count overhyping by homer, uninformed fans. Bogaerts can definitely guarantee that.

  50. AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

    I know who Vasquez and I’d take Swihart over him every single day.

  51. NoNames7225 1 year ago

    “And Stanton is a ball player that had ONE great year, and a really good rookie year.”

    Which is way more than what any of those minor leaguers/prospects have done.

  52. TheRealRyan 1 year ago

    He’s played 3.5 MLB seasons and has been worth 14.8 rWAR and 13.5 fWAR. That averages out to 3.8-4.2 WAR, or about 4 WAR/season. That also includes all of his knocks for being injured. If you went with his WAR/150, he has been worth 4.1-4.5 WAR.

  53. AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

    Aka basically every fan Trout trade proposal.

    “but your getting FIVE players in the deal for one. How is that not a win!?!”

  54. AcaciaStrain 1 year ago

    He hit 231./261/.333 in the World Series. His post season numbers are basically propped up by his 6 at bats in the ALCS.

  55. toddcoffeytime 1 year ago

    Bogaerts is a top shelf prospect, which will fail from time to time. Stanton is a proven commodity with an “equally good chance” to get better. Stanton has a MUCH higher floor, and an equally high ceiling (10+ seasons over 4 WAR)

  56. TheRealRyan 1 year ago

    There is almost the same chances that Bogaerts averages more than 2.5 WAR than less than 1.5 WAR. Almost 40% chance of either of these outcomes. Last year, in an injury plagued season where he only played in 116 games Stanton was worth 2.3 WAR. Stanton’s floor is an above average player. Bogaerts floor is a below average player.

Leave a Reply