Quote from MrPadre19 on January 30, 2020, 7:23 pm

Quote from onlypads on January 30, 2020, 5:27 pm

Quote from fenn68 on January 30, 2020, 4:54 pm

Per the Boston Globe:

On the Padres’ side, they “seem open on just about any other outfielder” than Tommy Pham or Trent Grisham in trade talks.

Duh! Doubt Margot, Naylor, Cordero, or Ona would ever become a roadblock and after that not much until you get to Head .... but does that suggest Trammel is in play and maybe lost favor? On the flip side, they must be locked in on Grisham for CF.

=====

Saw a different note that Verdugo may be in play from the LAD (see my previous note) but only as "part" of what goes back to Boston. "Part" is what gets me ... was near the top of the Top 100 then hit near .300 last season (1/2 year) with plus defense. 5 years control and at league minimum.

Betts may be elite but for a team that will win the NL WEST without him they don't NEED him and not all that sure that a full year of Verdugo (at maybe a 4 WAR) would not be impactful enough vs the maybe 6-7 WAR of Betts without taking on the $27MM (could be spend elsewhere) and the additional 4 years of Verdugo.

 

Perhaps the author is merely offering an observation. The pairing of "it seems" rather than the front office indicates/sources say and Verdugo merely being a part of the return package as you point out with respect to LAD makes me think it may be the case.

Like you I imagine LAD balks at that offer.

I think LAD can get it done without Verdugo, Seager, Lux, or May quite easily.

Imagine Bellinger, Verdugo, and Betts in your OF..yikes. Ridiculous on defense and offense.

Imagine a first 4 in the line up of:

Tatis

Pham

Betts

Machado.

Not sure any team would have better except maybe the Astros.

 

Quote from onlypads on January 30, 2020, 9:15 pm

Quote from MrPadre19 on January 30, 2020, 7:23 pm

Quote from onlypads on January 30, 2020, 5:27 pm

Quote from fenn68 on January 30, 2020, 4:54 pm

Per the Boston Globe:

On the Padres’ side, they “seem open on just about any other outfielder” than Tommy Pham or Trent Grisham in trade talks.

Duh! Doubt Margot, Naylor, Cordero, or Ona would ever become a roadblock and after that not much until you get to Head .... but does that suggest Trammel is in play and maybe lost favor? On the flip side, they must be locked in on Grisham for CF.

=====

Saw a different note that Verdugo may be in play from the LAD (see my previous note) but only as "part" of what goes back to Boston. "Part" is what gets me ... was near the top of the Top 100 then hit near .300 last season (1/2 year) with plus defense. 5 years control and at league minimum.

Betts may be elite but for a team that will win the NL WEST without him they don't NEED him and not all that sure that a full year of Verdugo (at maybe a 4 WAR) would not be impactful enough vs the maybe 6-7 WAR of Betts without taking on the $27MM (could be spend elsewhere) and the additional 4 years of Verdugo.

 

Perhaps the author is merely offering an observation. The pairing of "it seems" rather than the front office indicates/sources say and Verdugo merely being a part of the return package as you point out with respect to LAD makes me think it may be the case.

Like you I imagine LAD balks at that offer.

I think LAD can get it done without Verdugo, Seager, Lux, or May quite easily.

Imagine Bellinger, Verdugo, and Betts in your OF..yikes. Ridiculous on defense and offense.

Imagine a first 4 in the line up of:

Tatis

Pham

Betts

Machado.

Not sure any team would have better except maybe the Astros.

 

Ridiculous. No pitcher wants to see that top of the order.

Quote from JasonE135 on January 30, 2020, 10:35 pm

At this point everybody is just throwing out names trying to get any trade to look how THEY PERSONALLY want it to look. It's funny, Boston fans keep telling us it will take Gore and/or Patino to get anybody to take Myers, yet they keep trying to throw Price into any deal and expect to get more with him added. We are not going to take Price, and I doubt LA will either unless it gets them Betts for free. Probably not even then.

LA is just under $30 million from the luxury tax. Taking on Betts will put them right up against it. If they take Price, they will be forced over it for the next 3 years. You can see how desperate Boston is after 3 years over the tax. LA is not going to do that to themselves when all they have to do to get Betts is beat our offer. I mean really just taking on Betts will put them over the cap. LA is very careful with their money and they have a lot of their own stars to pay. At most they will take on Betts for 1 year and go over the tax for 1 year. They will not take Price. I doubt they are offering anyone better than Ruiz for Betts.

Quote from fenn68 on January 31, 2020, 5:58 am

As usual "local" fans and media over value "their" asset and "national" media just loves big stars with big histories and over values them. Seems as in most cases they just blow off the real world of potential buyers and ignore the value to the buyer when considering salary, control, and players to deal.

Buyers set the market and that is based on their needs ... not just the quality / "image" of the player and absolutely not what the seller / media wants or thinks. Media always want to focus on the player's past performance and avoids any real critical thinking on projection ... normally the buyers are smarter than that (although they sometimes get their projections wrong).

Pretty sure a Betts at 27 will continue at a very high level but everyone seems to be under valuing the drag caused by only 1 year control / $27MM just taking out almost all the buyers and eroding his value to the the potential buyer. For those who remember, Texas was highly criticized years ago when they were ultimately bidding against themselves to sign Alex Rodriguez (agent did great) and ultimately paid way more than any other team offered. Hopefully both SD and LAD are smarter and settle on "their price to pay" ... and let Boston sweat.

Price may be more of a disconnect. People still look at his performance in his mid 20 to boost his value. However, if you focus on his age 30 and after (last three years) ... injuries, decreasing production while still being owner $96MM over the next three years makes him not all that appealing to a buyer. Most other teams seem to see him (if healthy) a middle rotation arm at best. Maybe that is why Boston has not been able to get any buyer of Price without Boston taking back at least half of the contract and a minimal player return.

The speculation that adding Price to a Betts deal and still get a group of high quality prospects is, in my mind, delusional, especially given the financial responsibility the LAD have shown over the past several years and their minimal need for either Betts or Price .... "nice" yes but probably better off in the long run using the money and trade assets to acquire other upgrades. (think Lindor or Clevenger at mid-season IF Cleveland falls out of completion). LAD can afford to wait and still win the NL West.

All that makes a potentially desperate SD a better trade partner but even a better chance Betts stays in Boston and they just take the penalty .... just money to a very, very wealthy team and would keep their fans happier. Just DFA Bradley and that should get them out of tier 2 penalties ... so not even that big a penalty in reality. Getting under the $208MM is likely being overplayed.

Quote from Henry Silvestre on January 31, 2020, 7:18 am

Quote from 3fingersplit on January 30, 2020, 5:51 pm

Would the Dodgers make it happen if they already had a deal in place with Betts to extend him instead of him being able to go Free Agent?

That's where he wants to play

Pay attention Dodgers don't sign players for more than 3 yrs... Under new group... Mookie wants 10-12 yr deal.. LAD ain't going there

Quote from Henry Silvestre on January 31, 2020, 7:21 am

Quote from fenn68 on January 31, 2020, 5:58 am

As usual "local" fans and media over value "their" asset and "national" media just loves big stars with big histories and over values them. Seems as in most cases they just blow off the real world of potential buyers and ignore the value to the buyer when considering salary, control, and players to deal.

Buyers set the market and that is based on their needs ... not just the quality / "image" of the player and absolutely not what the seller / media wants or thinks. Media always want to focus on the player's past performance and avoids any real critical thinking on projection ... normally the buyers are smarter than that (although they sometimes get their projections wrong).

Pretty sure a Betts at 27 will continue at a very high level but everyone seems to be under valuing the drag caused by only 1 year control / $27MM just taking out almost all the buyers and eroding his value to the the potential buyer. For those who remember, Texas was highly criticized years ago when they were ultimately bidding against themselves to sign Alex Rodriguez (agent did great) and ultimately paid way more than any other team offered. Hopefully both SD and LAD are smarter and settle on "their price to pay" ... and let Boston sweat.

Price may be more of a disconnect. People still look at his performance in his mid 20 to boost his value. However, if you focus on his age 30 and after (last three years) ... injuries, decreasing production while still being owner $96MM over the next three years makes him not all that appealing to a buyer. Most other teams seem to see him (if healthy) a middle rotation arm at best. Maybe that is why Boston has not been able to get any buyer of Price without Boston taking back at least half of the contract and a minimal player return.

The speculation that adding Price to a Betts deal and still get a group of high quality prospects is, in my mind, delusional, especially given the financial responsibility the LAD have shown over the past several years and their minimal need for either Betts or Price .... "nice" yes but probably better off in the long run using the money and trade assets to acquire other upgrades. (think Lindor or Clevenger at mid-season IF Cleveland falls out of completion). LAD can afford to wait and still win the NL West.

All that makes a potentially desperate SD a better trade partner but even a better chance Betts stays in Boston and they just take the penalty .... just money to a very, very wealthy team and would keep their fans happier. Just DFA Bradley and that should get them out of tier 2 penalties ... so not even that big a penalty in reality. Getting under the $208MM is likely being overplayed.

Not just money .. Penalty also costs them their 1st..now..since they are above tier 2 lux tax yet another year

Quote from fenn68 on January 31, 2020, 7:27 am

Quote from Henry Silvestre on January 31, 2020, 7:18 am

Quote from 3fingersplit on January 30, 2020, 5:51 pm

Would the Dodgers make it happen if they already had a deal in place with Betts to extend him instead of him being able to go Free Agent?

That's where he wants to play

Pay attention Dodgers don't sign players for more than 3 yrs... Under new group... Mookie wants 10-12 yr deal.. LAD ain't going there

Good point ... best guess is that Betts will hold for a deal that beats Trout's ... 12 years / $426MM. Should be an interesting FA run after this season.

Quote from fenn68 on January 31, 2020, 7:53 am

Quote from Henry Silvestre on January 31, 2020, 7:21 am

Quote from fenn68 on January 31, 2020, 5:58 am

As usual "local" fans and media over value "their" asset and "national" media just loves big stars with big histories and over values them. Seems as in most cases they just blow off the real world of potential buyers and ignore the value to the buyer when considering salary, control, and players to deal.

Buyers set the market and that is based on their needs ... not just the quality / "image" of the player and absolutely not what the seller / media wants or thinks. Media always want to focus on the player's past performance and avoids any real critical thinking on projection ... normally the buyers are smarter than that (although they sometimes get their projections wrong).

Pretty sure a Betts at 27 will continue at a very high level but everyone seems to be under valuing the drag caused by only 1 year control / $27MM just taking out almost all the buyers and eroding his value to the the potential buyer. For those who remember, Texas was highly criticized years ago when they were ultimately bidding against themselves to sign Alex Rodriguez (agent did great) and ultimately paid way more than any other team offered. Hopefully both SD and LAD are smarter and settle on "their price to pay" ... and let Boston sweat.

Price may be more of a disconnect. People still look at his performance in his mid 20 to boost his value. However, if you focus on his age 30 and after (last three years) ... injuries, decreasing production while still being owner $96MM over the next three years makes him not all that appealing to a buyer. Most other teams seem to see him (if healthy) a middle rotation arm at best. Maybe that is why Boston has not been able to get any buyer of Price without Boston taking back at least half of the contract and a minimal player return.

The speculation that adding Price to a Betts deal and still get a group of high quality prospects is, in my mind, delusional, especially given the financial responsibility the LAD have shown over the past several years and their minimal need for either Betts or Price .... "nice" yes but probably better off in the long run using the money and trade assets to acquire other upgrades. (think Lindor or Clevenger at mid-season IF Cleveland falls out of completion). LAD can afford to wait and still win the NL West.

All that makes a potentially desperate SD a better trade partner but even a better chance Betts stays in Boston and they just take the penalty .... just money to a very, very wealthy team and would keep their fans happier. Just DFA Bradley and that should get them out of tier 2 penalties ... so not even that big a penalty in reality. Getting under the $208MM is likely being overplayed.

Not just money .. Penalty also costs them their 1st..now..since they are above tier 2 lux tax yet another year

No "loss" of pick ... but just having it moved back 10 slots (so not that bad). Plus think they need to be $40MM over to kick that in .. not there ... but even if applied the combo of penalty dollars and slippage in draft not enough to justify "giving away" Betts (and the Comp Pick he would generate) or, potentially, the return he could generate at the trade deadline when his cost is only $9MM.

It may be a benefit to Boston to NOT sell now (below their valuation of Betts) and wait (other teams may be interested at the deadline) while it may be a benefit to LAD to wait ... get him at the deadline since his value to them may just be in the playoffs ... or use those assets to get Lindor or Clevenger at the deadline. I know this is the story of the moment ... but that does not make it an urgent move by either team to alter their early 2020 seasons. Both teams have alternative scenarios to justify not making a deal now if they are not comfortable.

Not quite the same logic for SD ... Betts would improve the Padres early season BUT on a team that lost 92 games in 2019 ... enough to get them into a realistic playoff hunt without a very, very long list of current "ifs" fall the Padres way. Could argue that the Padres need to clear some of those ifs ... such as can Richards actually be effective, Grisham actually hit ML pitching, can Tatis play without getting injured, can Machado hit at PETCO ... again a long list.

I see not urgency for a deal on anyone's part.

Quote from Brian Connelly on January 31, 2020, 8:37 am

The speculation that adding Price to a Betts deal and still get a group of high quality prospects is, in my mind, delusional

Well put, FENN.  When Boston first said the cost for Betts in trade was 100% of Price $ AND 2 "top" prospects, I thought it was beyond ludicrous...  particularly the timing of it.   Free agency was 97% over, teams at/near their max payrolls.  There's literally not a team in MLB that's going to add 60 MM to their payroll at that point & give up prospects to do so... for 1 year of Betts (+maybe the comp pick)?

It was SO over the top, even by "I-know-we're-going-to-back-down-from-this" GM negotiating standards, I literally couldn't figure out what the point of saying it was?  Implies 1 year of Betts at 27 MM is worth... what 3? 4? "top" prospects, because Price's contract is negative value... guess "top" prospect can be pretty subjective 🙂