Quote from MrPadre19 on January 27, 2020, 1:55 pm

Wondering if our lack of interest at beating that "easy to beat" return for Marte has anything to do with our pursuit of Betts?

Hoping this Marte to Dbacks deal means we actually may be close.

Otherwise it seems odd we didn't beat that offer...unless it's his cost factor but we wouldn't have been interested at all if that was the case.

You would think anyway.

 

 

Quote from Brian Connelly on January 27, 2020, 2:10 pm

Quote from fenn68 on January 27, 2020, 9:33 am

In the ever evolving storyline of a Betts / Padres deal:

Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune updates the situation from the Padres’ perspective, covering quite a few notable details on the discussions. The Friars are said to be trying to structure a deal around a pair of young MLB-level players: one outfielder (Manuel Margot or Josh Naylor) and one pitcher (Cal Quantrill or Joey Lucchesi).

Supposing that aspect of the prospective arrangement meets with the desires of the Boston front office, there’s still the matter of sorting out the money. As has been reported previously, the Friars wish to offload as much as possible of the Wil Myerscontract, in no small part due to the fact that Betts is set to play for $27MM in 2020. But the sides are currently deadlocked on the dollars, with the Sox “offering to assume about half” of the $61MM still owed Myers and the Pads wishing “to eat only about a quarter.”

Buyer's choice and settle on the Padres eating 3/8ths of Myers' contract ($22.5MM) ... OK with that plus (at least in this version) preserve all the prospects. (If I were Boston ... take the longer control / higher upside of Naylor and Quantrill). Myers to RF, Naylor to 1B (Chavis to 2B), Quantrill SP (on an otherwise LH oriented SP staff).

I will believe it when it happens.

By my math, since Myers + Quantrill is worth at best Pads goal (1/4 Myers $ remaining = 15 MM), and at worst Sox goal (1/2 Myers $ to Pads = 30 MM).

That would mean the trade is Margot OR Naylor for Betts & a comp pick?   That CAN'T be true.  HAS to be a significant prospect/s in the deal too.  If not, Preller should be pounding Fowler/Seidler non-stop to give in here...

Would do this deal for any prospect below top 5, probably Campusano too.  Feels like the total difference of 15 MM over 3 years is resolvable to me..

Everyone is massively over-focused on "getting Bettts", and masssively under-focused on trading Myers out BOTH to save $, but also to open the spot/playing time in 2021 on.  A guy getting 20 MM/yr essentially has to play every day to try to build value, even when he's not worth it, and Pads have 2 with Myers & Hosmer...

Quote from fenn68 on January 27, 2020, 2:40 pm

Money .... money .... money ... that is the question.

So, Myers is 3 years $61MM ... Betts is 1 year $27MM.

If Boston gets its way the Padres take Betts' contract and eat 50% of Myers' contract which results in getting Betts for one year but paying $57.5 MM for that privilege. Net savings to the Padres only $3.5MM over the 3 year span? Then the Padres have to add a couple of ML players to get that deal. Not sure that makes sense for the Padres.

If the Padres are OK at eating at the 25% level they get to save $18.5 MM over the three years while getting Betts (and ultimately a Comp Pick) for one year at the cost of a couple of ML players. That at least does clear some payroll space for other needs.

Then cash flow is another issue. An even up deal adds $7MM to the 2020 Padre payroll ... can they afford taking back any of Myers' 2020 salary or do they have to take that 50% of total in the final 2 contract years ($15MM per) saving only $5MM per for the Padres. At the 25% level the saving would go up to $12.5MM per if only applied to the final two seasons.

Boston has to budge on the money side of this one.

Quote from sportwarrior on January 27, 2020, 2:45 pm

Quote from MrPadre19 on January 27, 2020, 1:55 pm

Wondering if our lack of interest at beating that "easy to beat" return for Marte has anything to do with our pursuit of Betts?

Hoping this Marte to Dbacks deal means we actually may be close.

Otherwise it seems odd we didn't beat that offer...unless it's his cost factor but we wouldn't have been interested at all if that was the case.

You would think anyway.

 

 

It does feel like that package was easy to beat... on the other hand, the two prospects were the 33rd overall pick last year and the 83rd ranked prospect in baseball this year. That's like a Morejon and maybe an Arias?

Quote from Brian Connelly on January 27, 2020, 5:21 pm

Quote from fenn68 on January 27, 2020, 2:40 pm

Money .... money .... money ... that is the question.

So, Myers is 3 years $61MM ... Betts is 1 year $27MM.

If Boston gets its way the Padres take Betts' contract and eat 50% of Myers' contract which results in getting Betts for one year but paying $57.5 MM for that privilege. Net savings to the Padres only $3.5MM over the 3 year span? Then the Padres have to add a couple of ML players to get that deal. Not sure that makes sense for the Padres.

If the Padres are OK at eating at the 25% level they get to save $18.5 MM over the three years while getting Betts (and ultimately a Comp Pick) for one year at the cost of a couple of ML players. That at least does clear some payroll space for other needs.

Then cash flow is another issue. An even up deal adds $7MM to the 2020 Padre payroll ... can they afford taking back any of Myers' 2020 salary or do they have to take that 50% of total in the final 2 contract years ($15MM per) saving only $5MM per for the Padres. At the 25% level the saving would go up to $12.5MM per if only applied to the final two seasons.

Boston has to budge on the money side of this one.

Good analysis.  I would still do a Pads eat 30 MM Myers $ deal if it's "just" Myers + Q + an MLB OF (preferably Naylor).

But if there is a prospect/s involved too, you're right; it can't work if Pads taking >50% of Myers' contract PER YEAR in 21 & 22; needs to be at least 10 MM savings/year there.  BUT Pads would be blowing through budget even if Boston takes all 20 MM Myers this year, which forces Pads to take more of the $ in 21 & 22....   definitely a catch-22.

Sweeten slightly with a lesser prospect & go Pads cover: 2 / 10 / 8 MM = 20 MM total = 1/3?

Quote from BoosterSD on January 27, 2020, 5:50 pm

If SD does make a deal to bring in Betts; especially without giving up the main SD prospects, should Preller go all in and call CLE and trade for Clevinger?

Replacing Myers with Betts, IMO gets us close to the second wild card. Adding Clevinger would have to make SD real contenders for the division, along with Paddack and Betts.

Quote from fenn68 on January 27, 2020, 6:24 pm

Quote from BoosterSD on January 27, 2020, 5:50 pm

If SD does make a deal to bring in Betts; especially without giving up the main SD prospects, should Preller go all in and call CLE and trade for Clevinger?

Replacing Myers with Betts, IMO gets us close to the second wild card. Adding Clevinger would have to make SD real contenders for the division, along with Paddack and Betts.

I am sure he would call Cleveland ... but a deal would be very hard. Cleveland won 93 games last season based on pitching (and without Kluber) ... just missed the wild card. Clevenger (a legit Cy Young candidate) has 3 years control and at only $4.1MM plus Cleveland has already dropped payroll under $100MM ... so no payroll issue. Then looking ahead some key players go FA after the season .. not a great near term farm system ... 2020 may be their last chance at the playoffs for quite a few years.

Preller has great prospects to offer but not really the ML ready hitters Cleveland would need to make up for the loss of Clevenger.

However IF Cleveland wanted to throw in the towel for 2020 ... Preller would probably have to use Patino (replace Clevenger), Arias (replace Lindor in 2 years), and maybe Campusano. No need for Cleveland to sell low ... and if he were really on the market their would be quite a few other teams bidding (think LAD) with maybe a blend of ML ready and prospects to construct a compelling deal.

Quote from dusty on January 27, 2020, 6:25 pm

Quote from BoosterSD on January 27, 2020, 5:50 pm

If SD does make a deal to bring in Betts; especially without giving up the main SD prospects, should Preller go all in and call CLE and trade for Clevinger?

Replacing Myers with Betts, IMO gets us close to the second wild card. Adding Clevinger would have to make SD real contenders for the division, along with Paddack and Betts.

I think that is what we see at the deadline, to be honest. Or at least something along those lines. If we commit to Betts this season, then one of two things happen: Padres play the way we all will expect them to play and be playoff contenders forcing us to make a move for an ace and really go for it with Betts in the fold or Padres fall victim to either injuries or 2015 all over again and flip Betts at the deadline. In my opinion, you can;t make this deal without the expectation to make the move for the ace at some point between now and the all-star break/trade deadline.

Quote from BoosterSD on January 27, 2020, 7:22 pm

Quote from fenn68 on January 27, 2020, 6:24 pm

However IF Cleveland wanted to throw in the towel for 2020 ... Preller would probably have to use Patino (replace Clevenger), Arias (replace Lindor in 2 years), and maybe Campusano. No need for Cleveland to sell low ... and if he were really on the market their would be quite a few other teams bidding (think LAD) with maybe a blend of ML ready and prospects to construct a compelling deal.

Thats more of what I was thinking. I know they have paired down their salary, and I know that they still have a good chance to win the division, however have still seen that CIN might still want Lindor. And to pile on, it appears that CIN is now willing to talk about Senzel as a trade piece.

As much as I am enticed about the idea of Campusano, I would have to seriously consider a Patino, Arais, Campusano package for Clevenger IF SD trades for Betts.