Yoan Moncada made his debut in a Red Sox uniform yesterday, though it was not as publicized as the one he’ll eventually make in the big leagues. As David Dorsey of News-Press.com reports from extended Spring Training, Moncada’s coaches and teammates have been impressed with his work ethic early on. While literally only one fan was on hand to see it — Mr. Tony Medina of Fort Myers will have a unique story if Moncada lives up to his contract — the young Cuban banged a stand-up triple in his first plate appearance (video available at the above link).
Here’s the latest from the eastern divisions, featuring some other offseason storylines:
- Nationals GM Mike Rizzo confirmed that he held offseason talks with the Red Sox about starter Jordan Zimmermann, Jason Mastrodonato of the Boston Herald reports. Nothing ever materialized despite what “looks like a reasonable matchup on paper,” said Rizzo, who explained that the teams had serious discussions over realistic scenarios. “I don’t think we laughed away any of [the offers],” Rizzo said. “We took them all serious. We were fortunate to be in a position where we didn’t have to move the player and if we would’ve got the right deal we would’ve. The right deal is in the eye of the beholder and we felt like we needed to get legitimate value for who Zimmermann was, and not the fact that he has one year left of control.”
- The Orioles never pursued lefty Andrew Miller this offseason beyond a single “touch-base” conversation, Dan Connolly of the Baltimore Sun reports. That was, of course, not due to any dissatisfaction with Miller’s services down the stretch, but merely reflected the reality that he was going to (and did) command a significant commitment in free agency. Miller — who discussed his free agent experience on a recent episode of the MLBTR Podcast — has continued to dominate since joining the division-rival Yankees, including a lock-down 1 2/3 inning appearance last night at Baltimore.
I guess Rizzo values Zimm too highly.
Zimmermann was coming off a 5.3 WAR season and is in his peak. Hard not to value him highly. Moreover, the Nats didn’t need to move a pitcher. Seems like Zim was dangled in hopes of a desperation move (e.g. trading Betts), not to necessarily get fair market value… whatever that is.
BBR stats (2010-2014)…Cole’s age today…all other ages are next year at this time
Age ERA W HIP BA WAR IP
Cole 31.1, 3.00, 1.119, .238, 27.8, 1064
Price 30.3, 3.08, 1.120, .234, 21.9, 1079
Cueto 30.1, 2.73, 1.111, .239, 19.6, 863
Greinke 32.3, 3.38, 1.184, .255, 16.6, 984
Zimm 29.4, 3.08, 1.125, .249, 16.0, 801
Hamels has no history of repeated injury, his out pitch is the best rated changeup in MLB. Zimm has had TJS. I’m trying to remember off the top of my head but that latest study suggests most TJS pitchers start decline after four years and usually only last eight years.
Concerning numbers is Cole is the 2nd oldest and has the 2nd most IP. Also FIP believes he has had some luck on BABIP.
Yep…5 years worth of luck…he should be playing PowerBall.
All I’m saying is his walk rates have been going up and his K rate is good but not dominant, if some more hits start falling that ERA will be a rising.
Also, why he has shown ability to keep a low BABIP that is something aging of skills could eat away at.
Both fluctuate neither is that much of a trend
K/9- 9.1, 8.1, 9.0, 8.3, 8.7
BB/9 – 2.6, 1.8, 2.2, 2.0, 2.6
Starting in 2011 the BB/9 has gone from 1.82 to 2.59 and that’s concerning to me when his K numbers 8-9 K/9 while good aren’t exceptional.
My point is there is always fluctuation. Ups and downs are part of the game. None of the pitchers that we are talking about are Kershaw or Koufax.
Zimm last 5 years
K/9 7.8, 6.9, 7.0, 6.8, 8.2
BB/9 2.9, 1.7, 2.0, 1.7, 1.3
You could just as easily look at Coles #’s from 2007-2009 and believe he was on his way out, or Zimms #’s from 2009-2012 and say the same thing.
Jordan Zimmerman had a 2.86 BB/9 in 2009 and it was down to 1.98 in 2012 and 1.08 last year so that’s actually a good trend.
My point is there will be year to year flucation but Hamels is clearly seeing his walk rate go up and that’s concerning as he is aging.
I guess my point is Hamels has been a great pitcher the last 5 years, is still a very good pitcher now, but for the next 4-5 years I’d be concerned about him dropping off just like I would be for Price, Cueto, J Zimm, and Grienke.
This storyline is getting old. The Red Sox are not giving up Betts or Stiwhart. Move on.
I’m not saying they should. Personally I don’t want them to trade him I would rather they rebuild around him. The Phillies have so much money coming off the books it’s insane. I just get a laugh out of everyone who views him as “OK”. Personally I would not trade him for anything less than a package that includes an established MLB player. 70% of all prospects fail to make an impact.
Its good that your loyal to your players. I wouldn’t want to rebuild around an aging pitcher. Not when the Phillies probably won’t contend for another two-three years. I don’t think many (if any) teams are going to give you the type of player you want ( Betts). If I were you Id be hoping for a Braves or Red Sox style rebuild. You can’t get all the money and young players. Look at what the Sox got back for Adrian Gonzalzs. Pretty much nothing in terms of big prospects but they saved a ton of money.
Money is not the problem. Loyalty is not the issue. There are two ways to rebuild. You either start with an established veteran center piece or two… Or you can take the seven year plan and tried to rebuild around nothing but inexperienced prospects and very cheap “coulda been” veterans. My preference is to start a rebuild around someone who has “been there”. My preference is also to have at least one ace… Someone who gives the team and excellent chance to win each time he is on the mound. To do otherwise instills more of a losing attitude.
The Phillies are not gonna be good for a while. Every other team in that devision has a lot going for them. It would probably be the opposite of what you are saying. Holding on to your one asset is just gonna slow down your rebuild. Stars are usually traded for a package of prospects. The phillies have pretty much no real talent at the MLB level and the Farm is in the bottom third. hameils is gonna waste away. As a Red Sox fan I have little interest in him. They will probably go out and get Cueto or a different rental if they need him. Cole is already being paid at near market level. He’s not getting any younger. By the time you plan to contend he will probably no longer even be an ace.
With payroll at $70m next year and in the mid $30m the following year there is more than enough resource to make a huge impact through FA signings. I am fully aware that the farm system is less than desirable. It is not my contention that they will be winning a WS during Hamel’s current contract. It was not that long ago that Philly was a desirable place to play because they were committed to winning. Yes, they retained the players much too long and are in a pickle. That commitment to winning, to paying for talent is easy to reestablish. You do not have to sign every top FA out there but, if they could add a Cueto to help transition and a few other established position players you are not looking at a seven-year rebuild to the postseason, rather 3-4 max.
So if your looking at a 3-4 year rebuild why waste him? Why not get 4-5 players including a couple top 100 guys to either build with or trade? Also I doubt Cueto goes to the Phillies at this stage and if he did they would have to over pay at a price of over 200 mil. Not the best rebuild idea.
The kind of big free agent pitcher signings next offseason would really only help the next couple of years. These massive pitcher contracts are signed so that they could put you over the top now and you punt the last few years. The phillies are at least 3 years away from contention, but more realistically about 5. And money does not solve all problems here, it could create longer problems. I would trade Hamels now or at the deadline because if you hold onto him, he will hemorrhage your future even more.
Phillies fans just have to grin and bear it over the next year or so and see what happens. There is way, way too much terrain to cross to make any predictions one way or the other.
Savvy moves and good fortune could thrust the Phillies back into wild card contention by 2017, or boneheaded moves and bad luck could set them back another few years.
Phillies fans are the best.
This is an irrelevant comparison because the contexts are so wildly different. If you are trying to make the case that Hamels is a better pitcher than Zimmermann, then fine–that is certainly up for debate. But the scenarios for both teams are so wildly divergent right now (and have been for years), that the motivations that drive trades and inaction are 100% different.
Fundamentally, the Phillies are sitting on a wasted asset and are risking him getting hurt and losing value. The Nats are in the midst of a prime run where each additional win means a lot. I’m not trying to say that one pitcher is better than the other. But comparing the stats of the two pitchers ignores a MAJOR component of what the actual issue at hand is.
More than anything else, why are we even talking about Cole Hamels in this thread? Who cares?
Only to a point. The acquiring team will try to exert whatever leverage it can, but “at the end of the day” the asset is the asset.
His name was brought up before the thread as a comparison. As far as who needs to trade who. Neither team has an ultimate need at this point unless their value is met. I keep hearing people say trade him for at least 4 prospects. When chances are three of those four won’t even make an impact, my question is why? Yes, I understand the value of having prospects but I also understand the value of trading for value. If I was the Nats… I would not let Zimm go for peanuts either.
Yeah, I think that where people diverge in opinions is in the respective “needs” of both teams and how that should guide roster decisions. But whatever. Who am I?
There is a BIG difference between Rizzo and Amaro. One thinks rational…. The other does not…..
All the more amazing, then if they both asked for Betts.
I doubt that. Matter in fact, I doubt Rizzo countered any of the offers he received. I’d say he was just letting people know Zimmermann was available, and fielded offers from teams. He wasn’t particularily fond of any of the offers, so he decided to keep Zimmermann. Rizzo is a smart GM. He knows he wouldn’t get Betts if they wouldn’t trade him for Hamels. Having said that, there probably wasn’t a deal to be made anyways, unless they wanted Margot, or Devers.
So if he asked for Betts…..would that be rational?
Why wouldn’t it be (not that the report even suggests it)? If the point was to say, “this is what we’d need to move this guy in a year we have every expectation of contending”? Rizzo was complimentary of Cherington, said the teams just didn’t match up, etc. He said the offers that were made were legitimate and fair, but just didn’t make sense for his club.
Kinda the point I was insinuating. If you are asked trade a TOR guy you ask for a high return. RAJ has been called irrational by some for requesting Betts. I was just wondering if the same was thought of Rizzo.
The interesting part is that since Zim will be a FA, an acquiring team will get a rental unless an extension is agreed upon. You would expect something similar to a Lester Deal. 6y/$155.
I thought the Nats offered him like 185 and he turned it down.
They offered him 5y/$85M $17M AAV. How can anyone turn down $185M? that was the “present value” of the Sherzer deal.
I thought it was more, They made a mistake of giving Scherzer the money, now they will lose Zimmermann fister and possibly strasburg
yea, It sure did set the bar pretty high. Scott Boras somehow got them to go for it. The killer is the years. They cannot give every other deserving player 7 years at a huge AAV.
especially when half the contract is deferred , on top of losing zimmermann and fister, desmond and span are free agents
At this point, you would have to assume that they will give QO to Zimmermann, Fister, Desmond and Span, get 4 compensation picks, and compare all offers/scenarios to that.
They signed Scherzer because they knew they were going to lose Zimm, Fister, and Strasburg over the next 2 years.
2015: Max, Zimm, Stras, Gio, Fister is a nasty rotation
2016: Max, Stras, Gio, Roark, AJ Cole is a very good rotation.
2017 and beyond Max, Gio, Roark, Cole, Giolittle is also a good rotation.
not sure how Cole and giolito will pan out
Well giolito was considered a top 5 draft pick type talent before needing TJ. He is a top 20 prospect and has filthy stuff so I have a hard time seeing him bust.
AJ Cole should be good enough as a number 5 but if not another prospect/cheap veteran SP can replace him.
They will wait and see, and have available funds to add another starter if that seems prudent. There are other arms, too: Treinen, Taylor, Ross, Fedde, etc.
Deferring contract money can be mortgaging the future, or it can simply be a financial mechanism.
Like anything else, as long as it’s done in moderation. Moderation seems to take a back seat to “Hey, look this works, let’s keep doing it.”
The Porcello extension raised the stakes. It is almost a guarantee that each one of the major FA’s will be seeking in excess of $25-27m/year easily. There are enough players on the market that 3 $200m contracts could be signed.
I agree in a sense, but I think there’s going to be cases of everyone not getting what they want this year unless deferred money becomes a new norm,because I don’t know that there’s going to be enough teams to offer up contracts of that magnitude for all of the pitchers available next free agency. Moreover, I wonder if teams will have consensus of a feeling that Porcello was an overpay like many of us feel. Should be interesting regardless.
In a sense, deferred money is a race to the edge. The more they do it now, the less able they would seem to keep doing it later.
yea, you have to wonder if teams are going to be offering those 7 year deals next year.
Some certainly will…. They always do. I think it’s going to take a few more years before teams start reining in the length of contracts and just paying a higher yearly average.
Given his age, it’s pretty clear Porcello was able to command that AAV because he didn’t get 6, 7, 8 years. I think that will be factored in when using the deal as a comp.
Interesting to me that it’s just a touch over the Shields deal; obviously Porcello doesn’t have the track record, but he’ll finish his deal at ~two years younger than Shields begins his.
My initial question/thought was how much of that AAV is based on hopes of him taking a leap forward production wise to continue his upward trend, because on paper, a lot of us fans don’t see Porcello as that high-dollar of a guy as things sit. Although, maybe Boston offered more to avoid a longer term commitment, that could make some level of sense.
Yes, along that line of thinking, perhaps eventually players would need to choose between contract length and AAV.
The Porcello extension didn’t really raise the stakes, it looks a lot like the Homer Bailey extension. Bailey got $86 million for 2016 through 2019, Porcello got $82.5 million.Bailey is almost 3 years older and started with a lower base, $9 million versus $12.5 million for Porcello.
Now I’m curious what the Red Sox actually offered and even if the Nats are making a serious run for the WS would they still be willing to trade Zimm by the deadline.
The fact that the Nats even listened to discussions on Zimmerman surprises me, I had previously assumed that they hung up the phone on calls due to their desire to make it to the WS this year, not just contend, and the fact that they have Fister also in his walk year. If anything I thought Fister would be more of a possibility, but now I wonder if they’ll listen closer to offers at the deadline this year.
The Nats would still have the best rotation in baseball even without Zimmermann. When you have one of the best rotations in recent history, it’s ok to move a starter or two.
I really don’t think that they move both, but I could be wrong as i’m not inside the GM’s head. I know they’ve got Roark who can easily take a rotation spot, but I’m not privy to their starting depth beyond that. Regardless, I do think without one of Zimmerman or Fister, they’ve still got the best rotation in baseball.
I know Giolito is the best starting pitching prospect in baseball, and Cole is another good one too. Not sure if they’re close to ready yet though.
I’m pretty sure both will be ready by next year at the latest.
They have Giolito and Cole who should be ready fairly soon. If not by the summer, definitely by next year. They could trade Zimm in July, have Roark take his place (Scherzer, Stras, Gonzalez, Fister, Roark is still amazing) and then let Fister leave in FA and replace him with Giolito in 2016. That’s what I would do anyway.
I was more ignorant to the readiness of the players as opposed to the players themselves. If they’re really that close, then there’s a case to be made. However, unless the Nats get an offer they can’t refuse, I would more readily shop Fister and let Zim carry them through the season than vise-versa.
they are 11th in ERA and 7th in FIP. The Mets are #3 in FIP
And it is 7 games into the season…..
and they have a losing record, partly because of position player injuries but the best rotation on paper isn’t working out to be the best rotation in the real world
It should shape itself up when they get into form. Also, their OF is a mess defensively right now, as evidence by them not catching balls yesterday against my Red Sox.
when you take away the fielding errors they are still no where near the top. they walk too many players, near the bottom of the league on strike outs, etc
7 games…….
7 games
It’s 7 games into the season.
Every team should be willing to field calls on every player under contract. You never know when some GM wants to go Herschel Walker on you and send over half the franchise for one of your guys. Yes, it’s a football reference but you get the idea. Never say never.
Sure, I guess. I mean I don’t want the Dodgers to trade Kershaw or anything, but if the Cubs want to come offering Lester, Bryant, Russell, and Soler, I guess I’d listen. lol
I dislike that trade for the Dodgers honestly
Ruben Amaro can only dream that a GM goes all Hershel Walker on him.
I think that is what he expects with every trade
I’m not sure, he hasn’t gotten it much.
And that’s based on what? His history of poor trades? He is no longer under the thumb of Dave Montgomery. This year he asked for top-flight prospects for a starting pitcher with stats for the last five seasons that ranked him right near the top. A starting pitcher with four years of team control below market value.
I was more pointing out the fact that he allowed his team to get very old without refreshing the system even when they were obviously on the down swing. Byrd rumors a few years ago come to mind.
As for the one asset the Phills do have (Hammels) I don’t think that they should trade him for anything less than a kings ransom
I agree with the Hamels part. My point is that it has become known that Monty was behind the extensions etc. Now that RAJ is asking for decent value, many are acting like he has had a history of it.
Phillies boxed themselves in with those contracts. Even now, it is difficult to unwind them. They are watching the parade go by waiting for remaining contract length to work off to the point that some trade value emerges.
Phillies should look for an excellent return RIGHT NOW. But once some of those other constraints loosen up, they can accept a deal that accelerates them into the rebuild; Provides talent to fill up the open holes. Without open holes, you just give yourself more problems that you already have.
There was talk after the Scherzer signing that Zimmermann was available for trade. At that time, I was certain they would move him as I thought it would be an unwise decision to keep him after giving Scherzer all that money, which could’ve been used toward resigning their homegrown talent. In other words, I figured they would’ve rebuilt the farm back up to a better level, and still would’ve had a star pitcher under contract for the future. Regardless, I don’t think he’ll be available for trade at the deadline unless they’re overwhelmed by the offer. I think it’s possible that Fister is moved though.
For me I think If the red sox are in it at by the deadline, I think they could go after Cueto or Zimmermann
I think if the Nats have a 10+ game lead by the deadline, Roark is ready to go back in the rotation, they consider the QOs they expect to issue at end of season, and the compensation stacks up, they could move Zimmermann or Fister. Especially to the AL where they only have to worry about facing them in the WS.
the Nats are losing due to poor offense. if you move Zimm in exchange for a good offensive player it would help them a lot. they only scored 17 runs so far which is MLB third worst
Its way, way too early to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of teams in just about every facet of the game, you’re not going to get a clear,accurate picture of the outlook until at least a month into the season.
A month in and you really cannot tell what a team will be. Baseball is a true marathon. For most teams it will be the All Star break where they can really assess their situations.
Well I said at least a month, not plainly a month, because it’s certainly case to case. At least a month in, you get a vague idea of the player’s ability to play on a daily basis, you get a good look at the stuff your pitchers are offering, and you can conclude, in a fair manner, concerns and strengths, as opposed to 7 games where things are just unraveling.
Absolutely. I was more agreeing with you and further disagreeing with anon’s assessment of attempting to value players with such a limited sample size.
They also have two key offensive players on the DL in Span and Rendon. Can’t knee jerk trade now just to temporarily fill a spot.
When he talked about a “matchup on paper,” I presume he meant that they needed a 2nd baseman (Mookie), while the Red Sox needed a starter (Zimmermann).
I almost wonder if the Sox don’t get something done once people fully accept they are not trading Betts or Swihart.
I think at the time, the angels could of traded Kendrick for Zimmermann and maybe a prospect, But that wouldn’t of been enough for the nationals.
I don’t know why the Nats would have added a prospect. Zimm is at least as good as Kendrick, maybe better. Also younger.
But instead the angels traded Kendrick for Heaney, I would of traded kendrick for Zimmermann straight up. He would be helping the angels out right now, Imagine
Weaver
Richards
Zimmermann
Shoemaker
Wilson
Santiago/Tropeano and other arms waiting
Why in the world is Weaver first in this scenario?
Because he’s still the ace and the number one, even though a lot of people will say that belongs to richards. I’m not giving up on weaver yet, he started slow last year and he will find his groove.
He is not an ace nor a number 1. At this stage in his career, he’s a 3-4 starter at best. He’s worse than Richards and miles worse than Zimm, who IS a number 1.
He’s not the ace he once was from 2010-2011 , but look last year he started slow, and what did he do, won 18 games, over 200 innings, a respectable 3.59 era. Give him another start and I think weaver will get back into his grove, he might not have the velocity anymore but he’s one of the best deception pitchers there is, I am not giving up on the bulldog weaver. but when richards comes back to the rotation, they will be better. But the angels should of made that trade for zimmermann
If Rizzo even remotely thought he could get Betts for one year of Zimmermann, I think there would’ve been someone laughing at negotiations
I think so much of it is being able to justify trading someone of Zimmermann’s stature, rather than a value judgment. Rizzo wants to be able to say he won the trade because he got the Sox’ best young player.
No way the red sox will trade betts for zimmermann or hamels. They could trade E-Rod or Owens
I agree. I was talking about why teams with pitching seem to focus on Betts.
He can play center field, and isn’t he a natural second basemen?
I don’t think he cares about being able to say he won the trade. I think he would not have drawn away from the team’s current MLB production unless he was filling a need on the MLB roster and getting future value.
If Betts was involved in discussions I’m sure there were multiple players from each side going to even the value.
Sox can get something done sure, it just wont be Hamels.
I wish the angels could of made a trade for Zimmermann
Not for anything of value. Just like the O’s wont part with Gaussman and Bundy which seems to be the reason all of their big time trades get shot down.
well they traded e-rod for miller last year
True but that was still quite a haul for a 3 month reliever rental. Point being that every GM is going to begin the conversations with those two when discussing star player acquisitions
I think now they will say Gausman Bundy and Hunter Harvey are untouchable.
Probably. O’s have been top heavy for years with everything else of substance in low A. It’s amazing they have been able to make the moves they have made.
I was hoping bundy would be in the rotation this year, but probably will be there next season.
Tommy John really set him back. He has to be on the major league roster next year due to his contract.
Well maybe if somebody struggles this year around july or august, maybe they call him up
The O’s system is kinda depleted compared to the Red Sox. They have a ton to trade below their elite prospects.
Keep in mind, after all else is said, Nats might be tempted to trade Zimmerman and/or Fister to Bosox or other AL team just to keep him away from Phillies/Braves/Mets/Marlins in the FA market.
Mets don’t need to sign a big name FA SP with their young rotation and wouldn’t spend the $$ anyways.
Didn’t want to leave anyone in NL East out. But also remember that a key way to get competitive quickly is trade some of what you have for what you need and sign free agents to replace. I would not expect the Mets to be sleeping forever. Once they get a decent core to upgrade, and the money problems fade into rear view….
they could trade one or two of them young pitchers for tulo if he is healthy this year.
They’d both be free agents either way unless their (hypothetical) new teams extended them. Regardless, I don’t see this as a motivating factor, especially since none of the NL East clubs look like realistic suitors for those players. (Desmond, maybe.)
Free agents either way is a good point if no extension agreed upon. While I think the NL East clubs are probably not the first place you would look, I also think that could change quickly under the right circumstances.
I keep asking myself how Marlins are going to build around Stanton.
J Zimm to the Red Sox would have been interesting but wouldn’t have really worked.
Nats needed- Young cheap IF help for this year but Betts was off the table and Marreo/Coyle wouldn’t cut it.
Maybe if the Nats loved one of the Red Sox SP they would have done E-rod, Coyle, Marrero, and a 4th piece.
That’s way too much for one year of anyone.
Ehh Coyle is blocked for a long time and Marrero likely will be as well.
Not to mention if they did that trade before the offseason they could have had a qualifying offer.
Assets are just as valuable whether they are blocked or not. Someone could clearly use them at the ML level within a year or so. They’ll most likely be traded, but there’s no reason to package that much value for one year of a pitcher that’s not going to sign an extension.
Fair point and it may have been a little overkill but J Zimm is a top 10-15 SP that would really help Sox chances at a ring this year.
Sure, but you have to balance that with your needs for the future. You can’t sell off all your excess to get one year of a good pitcher, because then there’s no one left to do it again next season when you’ll need another one. And no, I don’t think the Red Sox are going to go out and sign one in the offseason.
not to get into the middle of this, but it seems that there are two essentially incompatible trains of thought. the first is that you don’t trade much of value for a one year rental (presumably before the year starts, so you can make a QO) and the second is that you don’t give up much for a more expensive quality veteran on a longer term, fairly priced contract (like hamels)
I think the red sox will do just fine without either zimmerman or hamels, but you have to give up real value for someone of this quality.
We were talking about Zimmerman not Hamels. Hamels was never mentioned. And you do have to give up real value. But four top 15 guys for one year of anyone is too much.
I placed that comment in the wrong place–the conversation thread includes discussions of Hamels higher up, all coming off of Bob Bunker’s original post.
No harm.
To be fair, some GMs would do it, some wouldn’t. Shark and Hammel for Russell, McKinney and Straily in 2014 is classic example. I’m not saying you are wrong, but there is also a use by date on plus prospects. Sometimes, you go for it.
Within context of Sox excellent positional depth, flexibility and current farm strength, it doesn’t look far-fetched either. Sox have 4 legitimate SP prospects at Pawtucket; Owens, Rodriguez, Johnson, Barnes that could debut this year. So, the current 5 ML SP plus those 4 guys eventually needs to find it’s solution. Nice problem to have.
To be fair the A’s got two pitchers they could slot into their starting rotation both of whom were having very good seasons. Hammel was on the last year of his deal but Shark had a year + left on his contract. Not the same as getting 1 year of a pitcher for 4 or your organizations top 15 prospects. Nor does a surplus of prospects mean the prospects you do have suddenly become less valuable. 4 top 15 prospects for one player for one year is way too much to pay. Regardless of what you have in your minors, you can always make another trade to fill another need. just because you have money to spend doesn’t mean you can pay way too much. There are always needs to fill.
To be fair, it wasn’t 4 of top 15. It was #6, #11, and #15 plus a 4th piece. That isn’t really a farm killing package for a premium talent. But my point wasn’t really to endorse that exact swap of talent, although I don’t think it’s way out of line if he’s the guy you want, either and that’s the ask. He’s only 28 and you have a full year to extend him.
You’re not going to extend him. You’re only getting him for one season. Four prospects for one season of anyone, with no guarantee of an extension is an overpay.
Even if that is true, if you acquire him before the season you can give him a QO, get a compensation pick which should be within a team’s top 15 prospects, and reseed the farm. So the rental can cost one less prospect than it appears.
Also, the “option” to extend him has value. He could have a fundamentally sound, but not dominating year, and could like it in Boston enough to sign a fair deal.
thats almost the same kind of package for cole hamels but without betts and swihart
I think a deal for Hamels would have to include Margot or Devers on top of E-Rod/Owens to add some upside to the package.
Yea, I think the red sox trade for either cueto or Zimmermann, but that is just me
Because of the relatively large number of good starting pitcher FA’s coming up at the end of this year, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a flurry of block-buster deals at or near the trade deadline and my guess is J. Zimmermann will be one of them.
This offseason was amazing, and it wouldn’t surprise me to see the deadline be amazing too.