Quote from onlypads on December 30, 2019, 4:13 am

Quote from MrPadre19 on December 29, 2019, 8:51 pm

Yeah I stopped reading at “The Astros made Verlander what he is today”.

 

A little dramatic 😂😂. Yes, there is more to Verlander than just his Astros years, in fact he was dominant at times.  However, there is no doubt he turned a page while pitching for Houston and defined his legacy.

Quote from onlypads on December 30, 2019, 4:29 am

Quote from JasonE135 on December 29, 2019, 9:34 pm

Okay, Mr. Tatis is right and I was wrong. So, a couple of corrections:

Verlander never did fall off a cliff, but was expected to. His fastball had dropped from 98 to 95 and his curveball wasn’t what it once was. He learned a slider and has defied my expectations. Yes, big prospects changed hands. I was wrong about that.

Cole was the one who the Astros made into who he is today. He had fallen into throwing sinkers. His last 2 ERA’s before he was dealt were 3.88 and 4.24. Those are maybe average today. Before the new super ball, those were a little below average. The Astros switched him back to the 4-seam FB and increased his breaking ball usage by a huge amount.

Agree there was some initial inaccuracies. But, the points are fair (not to say the pro Clev trade arguments aren't compelling). Here, a Clev trade is distinct from the trades the Astros executed.  Additionally, there is an exponentially greater chance a spec hits in the range of 1-10.

I think a seller of Clev is likely asking for Gore +++.  Gore, and included prospects, have substantial control, greater than Clev, and are cheap roster fillers.  As pointed out, the Astros trades required several prospects -- some requiring top 100 specs.  Given Clev's age, recent performanc, and control he is likely assigned much greater value than either Verlander or Cole.

Let's not act like the hold your specs approach is not at minimum, defensible. GMs certainly seem to be embracing the the hold your specs approach.  See LAD.  Especially when the trade involves volatile pitching and the asset is at its maximal value.

Quote from MrPadre19 on December 30, 2019, 6:22 am

Of course holding on to top 100 prospects is a good strategy.

Not sure anyone ever disagreed with that.

The question becomes how many/which ones is a bona fide #1 major league starting pitcher worth?

Then add in the cost of this particular starting pitcher and the answer is ALOT!

My guess is the Indians are asking for Gore also.....or some combination that includes Patino/Abrams or Patino/Campusano/Trammell.

Which is obviously why the trade hasn't happened.

As I said before I don't think Preller will include Gore/Abrams in any deal and will think long and hard about even including Patino.

I love having great prospects and a Farm system every other team envies...but we are just now in the "win now" window and adding a guy like Clevinger is the rare exception which may demand an over the top offer.

That's all I'm saying.

Esp. if we keep Gore/Abrams/Campusano and still find a way to get it done somehow.

I give it about a 5% chance anyone gives the Indians enough to make the deal considering they could just wait until this time next year and get the same level of prospects back.

 

 

Quote from fenn68 on December 30, 2019, 7:11 am

Closer to 0.000001% ... Cleveland has almost no motivation to deal Clevenger baring a return that no team can (or are willing to) pay.

Better chance of them dealing Lindor (but not by that much) since Lindor carries a high arbitration number (about $18MM) and should be in the $25-30MM range in 2021 coupled with a clear indication he will pursue the highest bidder in FA after 2021.

Cleveland has already dropped about $30MM in payroll (mainly Kluber and Kipnis) and are under $100MM so are not super motivated to cut more payroll (but never hurts if the player return is acceptable). The ask is high ... or he would have been traded by now ... with hitters being the primary returns speculated in the rumors (Lux / Verdugo ... Senzel). If the Padres are not willing to deal Tatis ... not a contender.

Quote from Henry Silvestre on December 30, 2019, 7:21 am

Quote from fenn68 on December 30, 2019, 7:11 am

Closer to 0.000001% ... Cleveland has almost no motivation to deal Clevenger baring a return that no team can (or are willing to) pay.

Better chance of them dealing Lindor (but not by that much) since Lindor carries a high arbitration number (about $18MM) and should be in the $25-30MM range in 2021 coupled with a clear indication he will pursue the highest bidder in FA after 2021.

Cleveland has already dropped about $30MM in payroll (mainly Kluber and Kipnis) and are under $100MM so are not super motivated to cut more payroll (but never hurts if the player return is acceptable). The ask is high ... or he would have been traded by now ... with hitters being the primary returns speculated in the rumors (Lux / Verdugo ... Senzel). If the Padres are not willing to deal Tatis ... not a contender.

If they are not re-signing Lindor in FA ..in 2 years.. Then the window to "maximize" trade value is NOW (highest return).. That return foes down at deadline..and then gets cut in 1/2 next off-season (like Betts now)...  So if your the Indians GM you either squash the Lindor trade talks and say we are riding with him for 2 more yrs and then getting our draft pick.. Or you move him for a tremendously high price..Lux + May ++ ..Patino + Hunt + + etc.. Next off-season he gets you May + or Hunt + but not a Lux or Patino...

Quote from fenn68 on December 30, 2019, 8:02 am

Quote from JasonE135 on December 29, 2019, 11:42 pm

I wan willing to say, right now, that if Patino has another year anything close to the one he had this year, then at this time next year he will be a top 15 prospect. Probably top 10. I expect him to be top 15 next year if he doesn’t get injured.

If the Padres are not in legit contention at the trade deadline (they could still have improved to .500 and not be in contention) ... I could see the Padres dealing Richards and Davies and we see Gore and Patino in the Padres' starting rotation in August - September setting them up for 2021 with some ML experience. As pitchers with superior talent ... minor league experience is not better than ML experience. Peavy and Paddack did not waste time in the minors.

Add "injuries" or under performance to the assumed starting 5-6 ... odds get better to see one or both late in the season.

They are pretty close to the ML ... and setting up a nice 6 year window of quality SP for the Padres. They could get injured but so could any pitcher. They could fail to develop but a veteran could regress and will be gone sooner.

Pretty comfortable anticipating a 2021-2024 with Gore (L) - Patino - Paddack - Lamet - PTNL from the rest of the pack.

Quote from MrPadre19 on December 30, 2019, 8:47 am

The again.....if Davies pitches well he’d make a great #5 for 2021.

 

Quote from Brian Connelly on December 30, 2019, 8:51 am

Quote from fenn68 on December 29, 2019, 12:26 pm

Actually do worry about Richards ... too many are just conceding him a major role based on "hope". He has not had a good season since 2015 (which was down from his best in 2014) and those were his only two good seasons. So ... beset by injuries ... the last 4 seasons were nothing of note ... will be 32 next season.

Can anyone really rely on him making through a full season .. being anywhere close to his 2015 performance level (ERA in mid-3s) or we will see a guy lucky to rack up 120 innings with a 4+ ERA? Makes the case for not dealing either Quantrill or Lucchesi now.

About mid-season, would not be surprised that either Gore or Patino (or both) move into the starting rotation with good minor league results and the ML incumbents injured or underperforming.

So, maybe a bit of Preller's decision making in dealing Quantrill or Lucchesi this winter (for anyone) is his conviction of the remaining 5 SP options being effective out of the blocks and the timing of the readiness of Gore and / or Patino to step in when needed. Did hear one suggestion that the Padres see Gore as really close to ML work ... with the outside chance (outside mind you) that he could earn a slot to start the season (like Paddack). They think he is that good and that close.

We did not sign Garrett Richards for 15.5 MM - 18 MM for essentially 1 season of pitching for him to be a #5/swingman.  Lock one of 3 best SP, could even be O.D. SP.   Richards & Lamet (IMO) , Gore, & Patino being limited to 150 IP is the central reason I believe we need TOR SP THIS offseason.

Quote from Brian Connelly on December 30, 2019, 9:24 am

Jason, I love most of your posts, and the idea of buying relatively "low" vs "high" does of course make sense (I agree HOU Greinke trade was RELATIVELY low due to high salary; but still 4 for 1, a top 100, and almost had to do it knowing Cole likely gone),as does waiting to make that 1 big trade until your team is that 1 piece away.  But by saying that you "personally wouldn't trade Patino + a 2nd tier prospect" for Clevinger, you're definitely well below what 100% of GM's would see as a floor offer of what they would take for Cleveinger....  so you've got to recognize that you are the outlier...BUT it doesn't mean you're 'wrong'...

It all depends on how you see/value Patino.  I would not trade Gore straight up for Clevinger.  Reason is I think he is as close as you can get to being a lock TOR SP as a prospect can be.  Ideal size, stuff, athleticism, competitiveness, control, etc.   Irreplaceable prospect like Tatis.  2 years ago I actually rated him "above" Tatis as #1 prospect in system, b/c I thought at THAT time they were like #20/21 MLB overall, but both clearly had (& exceeded) top 10 MLB potential.  But I would trade Patino (6'0" 192)+ a "2nd tier prospect" in a heartbeat for Clevinger (6'4" 215)

You're basically arguing that you see Patino as being nearly equal to Gore.  I REALLY hope you're right, since 90%+ chance he is Padre system opening 2020.  But there isn't even a consensus that a RHP with his build/frame can remain at SP, let alone TOR.  To me, at #30 overall, I think he's a little overrated despite his performance due to that risk which has destroyed & slowed down respectively the last 2 elite SP prospects we've had with similar builds:  Espinoza & Morejon.