Forum

You need to log in to create posts and topics.

Off Season Thread

Quote from Ben Davey on February 3, 2020, 11:10 pm

The thing with building a farm is that they are to be used to get you to the World Series.  In the case of some of the players, their usefullness might revolve around them being traded to give us an upgrade.  The Padres can only have so many players on the active roster.

Easiest example is Edwards and Arias.  If you believe Tatis and Machado will be the left side of the infield for years to come what do you do with Arias and Edwards?  Neither are in a position to help the club now, and even if/when they do make the majors it probably wont be at their first positions.  So what do you do?  You trade them in the right deal.  There is no rush to get rid of them, but the Padres thought getting Pham was too good to pass up and gave up Edwards.

Quite a few scouts think that Naylor's bad still profiles as a solid MLB player (a DH but still a solid mid order bat).  If you are the Padres, does Naylor even make the team?  Do you risk his defense?  He was a former top 100 prospect, still really young, what do you do with him?

As someone who extensively covers the minors, it would sting to give up four or five prospects for Betts, but if we are playing in the WS in 8 months, its hard to say it wouldnt be worth it.

And FWIW if they could pull off a deal of Campusano, Morejon, Naylor, Myers and 20 mil for Betts and maybe a rookie level prospect, I would be all for it.  I think the Red Sox would do Naylor and Campy for Betts straight up, but if you want to unload Myers you have to add more.  Yay for negative value contracts.

 

Agree 100%

Quote from Ben Davey on February 3, 2020, 11:10 pm

The thing with building a farm is that they are to be used to get you to the World Series.  In the case of some of the players, their usefullness might revolve around them being traded to give us an upgrade.  The Padres can only have so many players on the active roster.

Easiest example is Edwards and Arias.  If you believe Tatis and Machado will be the left side of the infield for years to come what do you do with Arias and Edwards?  Neither are in a position to help the club now, and even if/when they do make the majors it probably wont be at their first positions.  So what do you do?  You trade them in the right deal.  There is no rush to get rid of them, but the Padres thought getting Pham was too good to pass up and gave up Edwards.

Quite a few scouts think that Naylor's bad still profiles as a solid MLB player (a DH but still a solid mid order bat).  If you are the Padres, does Naylor even make the team?  Do you risk his defense?  He was a former top 100 prospect, still really young, what do you do with him?

As someone who extensively covers the minors, it would sting to give up four or five prospects for Betts, but if we are playing in the WS in 8 months, its hard to say it wouldnt be worth it.

And FWIW if they could pull off a deal of Campusano, Morejon, Naylor, Myers and 20 mil for Betts and maybe a rookie level prospect, I would be all for it.  I think the Red Sox would do Naylor and Campy for Betts straight up, but if you want to unload Myers you have to add more.  Yay for negative value contracts.

 

Preller has said in the past building a strong farm system ... in part ... is to use in trades to improve the ML club.

The "disconnect" is the string of assumptions that support a specific trade at any point of time. IF the deal gets you a high probability of the payoffs that is worth more than moving from a non-contender to a better non-contender with a low probability of the playoffs.

Then few will agree on the value of the "target" add to the current club winning during their run with the Padres or the value of the pieces traded in the future for the Padres winning (or the potential for future "alternative" deals that help the Padres more).

I have my view of the future value of the Padres prospects and if they don't align with becoming a quality ML regular ... easy for me to package 3-4 in a trade. However, if they project as keys to the Padres future (e.g. Gore) not going to move them for someone being jettisoned by some other team. In between group 1 and group 2 are some prospects that would be in play only if the target has a high probability getting the Padres to the playoffs during their run as a Padre.

Since I don't think the add of Betts (even if they could afford his contract) will move the 2020 Padres into the high probability playoff zone ... I would not use any of my more valuable trade chips ... but still would deal for him IF Boston would take the likes of Margot, Naylor, Quantrill, Lawson, Olivares ..... fine with a 4 for 1 if it is my 4.

I'm guessing Preller,and ownership,disagree with you that adding Betts doesn't give us a high % chance of the playoffs.

Otherwise I don't think they would be involved in all this.

Yes it could save us money the next 2 seasons and free up a few roster spots....but they have to believe adding Betts gets us to the promised land.....right?

I know we lost 90 games last year but we played so much better the first half "with Tatis" that I don't believe we really "were" a 90 loss team.

A healthy Tatis...even half a season with Gore...the adds of Pham,Profar and Grisham IMO all add up to a good chance at the WC.

Adding Betts could only help that chance immensely.

Our rotation alone is much better than we started 19 with and the BP is improved.

I really don't see how these changes plus adding Betts can't get us to 85+ wins.

Of course there are the regular factors everyone has to deal with...injuries,regression,slumps etc....but I also see a huge year from Machado with Tatis and Pham ahead of him for 150 games.

Padre optimism I guess but I've had it forever so why stoop now?

 

Quote from MrPadre19 on February 4, 2020, 7:01 am

I'm guessing Preller,and ownership,disagree with you that adding Betts doesn't give us a high % chance of the playoffs.

Otherwise I don't think they would be involved in all this.

Yes it could save us money the next 2 seasons and free up a few roster spots....but they have to believe adding Betts gets us to the promised land.....right?

I know we lost 90 games last year but we played so much better the first half "with Tatis" that I don't believe we really "were" a 90 loss team.

A healthy Tatis...even half a season with Gore...the adds of Pham,Profar and Grisham IMO all add up to a good chance at the WC.

Adding Betts could only help that chance immensely.

Our rotation alone is much better than we started 19 with and the BP is improved.

I really don't see how these changes plus adding Betts can't get us to 85+ wins.

Of course there are the regular factors everyone has to deal with...injuries,regression,slumps etc....but I also see a huge year from Machado with Tatis and Pham ahead of him for 150 games.

Padre optimism I guess but I've had it forever so why stoop now?

 

Your are sort of proving my point on different "assumptions" alter the trade logic.

Now I do think the Padres would pursue Betts even if the chance for the playoffs by adding him is still a low probability ... his "entertainment" value and trade deadline value combined with the increase playoff probability is worth the pursuit ... and if can squeeze in the movement of Myers (and a major part of his contract) ... all good ... if that can happen at the Padres' price.

That is a lot of "valuation points" where the assumptions can send us in vastly different directions on the "valuation" of the pieces needed to make the deal.

 

MLB.com has an interesting article with 5 hypothetical Betts trade scenarios ... 2 with the LAD ... 2 with SD ... 1 with ATL. Interesting since the writers do give their view on the factors all the teams would consider in saying yes or no.

Spoiler alert: one team or the other says NO to all the hypotheticals.

Let's just completely forget Betts for a second...

Would anyone consider a standalone trade involving Myers & one of our young MLB SP?   I proposed this all offseason.  Thought it could net 45 MM towards Myers' contract.  Then backed down to somewhere between 30-45 when the 2nd tier OF like Corey Dickerson signed lower AAV deals than I anticipated.  When the FA SP's all went off the board quickly for huge $$$, I didn't see a way to re-allocate Myers' $ even if he was dealt, so I assumed we'd hold him.

BUT there is now a trade  proposed where a team is wanting to make this deal... but is only offering about 30 MM towards Myers.  We are asking for 45 MM.

IF the deal comes to fruition, it's possible that they would take the majority of Myers' $ in 2020 for Pads to allocate elsewhere (let's just pretend it's earlier in FA), AND half of more of his remaining salary in 2021 &  2022!!   The SP we have to attach for this to happen is Quantrill or Lucchesi.  Either guy is very likely our #5 SP to open the season, and pushed out of the rotation when Gore, then Patino arrive.  The ONLY problem is, it would open a hole in RF where Myers was going to play.... oh, wait  🙂

HOLDING Myers into 2020 is in & of itself a very big risk.  Myers has underperformed expectations at LEAST 3 of 5 years as a Padre.  Hosmer has underperformed 2 of 2 years.  Myers is 29, Hos is 30.  There is a distinct possibility Padres are staring at essentially 40 MM in "dead" $ next year when we are supposed to be a contender; Myers 2/41 remaining, Hosmer's 2/40 or 5/79.

The goal of trading Myers this offseason was to be able to re-allocate the $ elsewhere to make the team better.  But even if all 29 teams had interest in the above trade, the REAL challenge turned out to be finding a way to prudently re-allocate the $$ without blowing a hole in the roster/lineup at 1 of the 8 positions.  Try to forget "Betts" & just think of the potential trade as maybe THE only way to MOST prudently re-allocate Myers $ not just in 2020, but also 21-22.   ... it's hard to even imagine a more useful way to re-allocate it than to a league MVP at the same position in his lifetime contract year.   This opporutuity is golden for Pads & should not fall apart over a 15 MM gap over 3 years.

Yep, would trade a number of players / prospects to move Myers (and the bulk of his contract) now .... and expect nothing except a token return from the lower minors.

I have always thought Toronto would be a good fit ... they have needs and money plus would want to supplement their hot prospects. They need OF, 1B/DH, and always pitching. Can debate how much they could / would take of the contract but Myers, Quantrill, Naylor, and a decent minor league SP prospect would seem to fit for Toronto to take most of the remaining money. Myers in a hitter's park such as in Toronto give hope to some upside production.

Probably could make an argument that a MIA deal could be worked.

Problem is not sure how Preller values the parts (including Myers) ... but clearly he has been actively trying to deal Myers for over a year ... has not found a buyer (at his comfort level). My guess other GMs understand the Padres situation and will not take enough of the contract (without elite prospects included) to make savings some Myers' money worth it.

With how the corner OF movement this winter played out ... not big demand .... Myers $61MM has to be viewed as near zero value given much cheaper alternatives that keep coming up.  Not sure any package of additional players / prospect can make up that difference ... unless it is to the detriment of the Padres future.

Quote from fenn68 on February 4, 2020, 7:44 am

MLB.com has an interesting article with 5 hypothetical Betts trade scenarios ... 2 with the LAD ... 2 with SD ... 1 with ATL. Interesting since the writers do give their view on the factors all the teams would consider in saying yes or no.

Spoiler alert: one team or the other says NO to all the hypotheticals.

I agree Pads say "No" on #1 (Campusano AND Trammell + more)...

But it had simply not occurred to me to fashion a trade NOT including Myers.  Pretty ingenious.  The $ impact to the Red Sox is very similar (to a deal w/ Myers) if they send 10 MM the Pads way... they net save 15 MM in luxury tax salary (27 - 10 - 2.5 Margot)... but don't see how Preller convinces Fowler et al to add that +15 MM even for just 1 season?!

I also agree Sox say "No" on #2... but it's very easy for Pads to close the gap & IF owners would allow the payroll... I'd upgrade:     1) + Naylor.   If not enough, 2) Quantrill over Lucchesi (maybe more $ to Pads?).    If not enough 3)  +Prospect/s > top 15.   Have to compel Boston to do it vs. waiting.

Would end up with:  Pham / Betts / Myers all RH OF.  Likely Grisham # 4 getting:  12-15 / 4-5 / 24-30 starts (40-50 total), all vs RHP.   With this specific OF, could see"the return of Jankowksi" to provide an elite defensive OF to hold leads late:  Pham / Freddy / Betts!      Here's the initial trade idea....

Proposal No. 2

Red Sox get: C Luis Campusano (MLB's No. 50 prospect), OF Manuel Margot, LHP Joey Lucchesi

Padres get: OF Mookie Betts, cash

As you can see, the return for the Red Sox isn't nearly as strong in a hypothetical deal that doesn't include Myers. For a trade like this to work, Boston probably needs to send San Diego money -- say, $10 million or so -- to cover some of Betts' salary. And remember: Any cash Boston includes to cover part of Betts' contract would count toward its 2020 CBT number, meaning another move would have to follow this trade for the Sox to get under the threshold.

Still, if the Red Sox think there's a good chance that Betts is going to walk next offseason, they could be compelled to accept a package centered around Campusano, one of the top catching prospects in baseball. Boston's current starting catcher, Christian Vazquez, is signed for two more seasons and has a $7 million team option (with a $250,000 buyout) for 2022, his age-31 campaign. Campusano could arrive in MLB at some point in '21 and be ready to assume the starting job the following year. Replacing Betts with Margot in right field would obviously be a huge offensive downgrade, but at least it keeps Boston's stellar outfield defense intact. Lucchesi, meanwhile, would give the Sox some much-needed rotation depth.

Who says no? The Red Sox. Campusano is a solid prospect, and Margot and Lucchesi could be useful pieces, but Boston would likely be more willing to take the chance that it can find a better offer before the Trade Deadline.

Always like hearing other opinions on the Betts situation. Heard a reporter taking the position that Boston is "holding all the cards" so don't have to hurry in making a deal since the Red Sox don't have to trade him and with two teams bidding ... milk this so one of the teams pushes up their offer.

Basically took the position that both LAD and SD are desperate to deal for Betts. I hold this as a pretty faulty assumption. Want to get Betts ... yes but do think both teams would have little issue walking from a deal. LAD will win the NL West and, if needed, can add at the trade deadline for the position of need (if there is one) to set up the playoffs. As for Preller, he has in the past said he will set a value on any target and if his offer does not get it done ... he walks. He is probably there with multiple offer scenarios.

Quote from Brian Connelly on February 4, 2020, 10:04 am
Quote from fenn68 on February 4, 2020, 7:44 am

MLB.com has an interesting article with 5 hypothetical Betts trade scenarios ... 2 with the LAD ... 2 with SD ... 1 with ATL. Interesting since the writers do give their view on the factors all the teams would consider in saying yes or no.

Spoiler alert: one team or the other says NO to all the hypotheticals.

I agree Pads say "No" on #1 (Campusano AND Trammell + more)...

But it had simply not occurred to me to fashion a trade NOT including Myers.  Pretty ingenious.  The $ impact to the Red Sox is very similar (to a deal w/ Myers) if they send 10 MM the Pads way... they net save 15 MM in luxury tax salary (27 - 10 - 2.5 Margot)... but don't see how Preller convinces Fowler et al to add that +15 MM even for just 1 season?!

I also agree Sox say "No" on #2... but it's very easy for Pads to close the gap & IF owners would allow the payroll... I'd upgrade:     1) + Naylor.   If not enough, 2) Quantrill over Lucchesi (maybe more $ to Pads?).    If not enough 3)  +Prospect/s > top 15.   Have to compel Boston to do it vs. waiting.

Would end up with:  Pham / Betts / Myers all RH OF.  Likely Grisham # 4 getting:  12-15 / 4-5 / 24-30 starts (40-50 total), all vs RHP.   With this specific OF, could see"the return of Jankowksi" to provide an elite defensive OF to hold leads late:  Pham / Freddy / Betts!      Here's the initial trade idea....

Proposal No. 2

Red Sox get: C Luis Campusano (MLB's No. 50 prospect), OF Manuel Margot, LHP Joey Lucchesi

Padres get: OF Mookie Betts, cash

As you can see, the return for the Red Sox isn't nearly as strong in a hypothetical deal that doesn't include Myers. For a trade like this to work, Boston probably needs to send San Diego money -- say, $10 million or so -- to cover some of Betts' salary. And remember: Any cash Boston includes to cover part of Betts' contract would count toward its 2020 CBT number, meaning another move would have to follow this trade for the Sox to get under the threshold.

Still, if the Red Sox think there's a good chance that Betts is going to walk next offseason, they could be compelled to accept a package centered around Campusano, one of the top catching prospects in baseball. Boston's current starting catcher, Christian Vazquez, is signed for two more seasons and has a $7 million team option (with a $250,000 buyout) for 2022, his age-31 campaign. Campusano could arrive in MLB at some point in '21 and be ready to assume the starting job the following year. Replacing Betts with Margot in right field would obviously be a huge offensive downgrade, but at least it keeps Boston's stellar outfield defense intact. Lucchesi, meanwhile, would give the Sox some much-needed rotation depth.

Who says no? The Red Sox. Campusano is a solid prospect, and Margot and Lucchesi could be useful pieces, but Boston would likely be more willing to take the chance that it can find a better offer before the Trade Deadline.

Proposal #2 looks like what was suggested a few days ago, except it was the same package with Myers included. I think these negotiations were basically over a few days ago. I don't see Preller doing this trade without getting rid of Myers. I absolutely don't see him also adding Trammell to the package after giving up what we did to get him.

I think that all this extra time on these negotiations is just a tactic to extract more from the Padres, like Trammell. If the Dodgers had actually offered Verdugo this would be over, deal done. The Padres wouldn't even still be in the running with Myers as part of our offer. Yet we still are. Why is that? Because Boston REALLY wants our prospects, and AJ will not give them up. He will give up Campusano to be able to get rid of Myers. Period. We aren't going to include Gore, Patino or Abrams for a rental. We won't even pay more than 1/4 of Myers salary. If we have to then what is the point of even trading him? Stay strong AJ. I get the feeling we will get him anyway. If not, does anyone here really care that much?