Forum

You need to log in to create posts and topics.

Potential frontline SP trade

Quote from sportwarrior on November 9, 2018, 1:13 pm

I think we should have little to no interest in a guy who is currently 35 and will be 36 for our 2020 season.

It hurts me a little to say that, too, since I myself am an active 35 year old with achy bones.

I get that; however, Greinke is pitching in possibly the 2nd worst ballpark in MLB and has been maintaining the very similar numbers to his time in LAD. His numbers are bad in ST, but still extremely good in the regular season. So I dont think its as bad as it seems.

So I get we are talking frontline SP and this doesn't get that exactly. But I don't have a problem betting on the stuff and COS/Balsley to elevate the true target of this trade's performance. I am also a believer in the stabilizing influence of (a) vets on young team and (b) innings eaters who at minimum give the team a chance to win 75% of the time especially with an otherwise young staff of SP/RP.  None of this works if the team is not willing to spend over the next couple years as Myers gets more expensive and young guys like Hedges get closer to arb.  We forget that with SDP spending commitment is always up for review, low payroll projections be damned.

So here is the deal i propose:

KC picks one from list 1-2 and two from list 3 or can pick two from list 2 and two from list 3 or up to four from list 3.

1. Lauer, L Allen, Lamet, Edwards, Potts, Quantrill, Renfroe, Reyes.

2. Yates (to flip), Naylor, Patino, A Allen, E or J Rosario, Munoz, Miller.

3. Stammen (flip), Oliveras, Aliva, Arias, Torrens, Coleman, Margevious, Ruiz (back), Rea, Erlin, lopez, Campusano, Hunt, Ornelas, Gettys, France, Nix, Kennedy.

The above could obviously be modified. If they want lesser guys because they see them differently, fine. Top prospects off limits if not listed. If they want  Hosmer or Myers back, let's talk.

So the return is: Duffy, Merrifield and Ian Kennedy.

If Merrifield can't play 3b as a starter, he can pair with Garcia and play 5 days a week all over to add offense. Kennedy is a proven innings eaters who can bridge to when the younger guys are ready to shoulder a real workload (usually in year two or three of career).  KC makes this deal because they get out from under Kennedy contract (and Duffy which isn't too bad).

If I am D Moore i grab Potts, Patino, Arias and Avila. Room to add another one or two guys from the lists to make the deal.

Scale back size if Merrifield out (which I get). I think key is taking back Kennedy to get KKC to sell low on Duffy.

 

 

 

 

Commie, interesting proposal...

and kudos for recognizing it might be 2 different deals.  Merrifield is interesting as a #1 hitter, but not a typical 3B profile, so not sure about the long term fit. but I'll focus on the pitchers...

Both Duffy & Kennedy are established MLB SP's.  Know what you're getting from Kennedy.  Duffy might have some upside with Balsley:  2016-17 Duffy definitely good enough to  put at front of  Pads rotation, but 2018 version was not.  He's more of a "buy low" guy, though who might have value.

But KC would be giving up 50 starts 275 IP with these 2; we'd have to give back more than 1 SP I think which might just cancel the deal out?  My gut says... fall back option if not able to pull off something 'bigger'.

Ian Kennedy .... seriously? ERA's of 4.66 (2018) and 5.36 (2017) and carrying a contract for ages 34 - 35 of $16.5MM - $16.5MM. Yes he is "established" but established as a BAD SP. Padres could do a lot better with that $33MM over the next two years. KC would probably buy Kennedy's bus ticket if the Padres would just take him and his contract and get zip in return.

As for Duffy 's 3 year contract for ages 30 -31 - 32 runs at $15.25 - $15.25 - $15.5MM ... a commitment of $46MM for a pitcher who had a 4.88 ERA in 2018 and ended the season on the DL with a left shoulder impingement. No a good gamble at that cost when the Padres have SP options arriving to this year an in the next couple of years.

Would think the Pads could do better by taking the combined $32MM (2019) and $32MM (2020) and just go for one of the big FA SP (Corbin or Keuchel or Eovaldi) and still have about $10MM leftover .... actually they could pay for Greinke without AZ eating any contract and then unlikely to cost much if anything in prospects.

Just to toss it out there... if you're looking for a really off-the-radar trade target, Jose Berrios. The Twins are in a really weird spot after their key young guys took a step backward last year. They may decide to spread their risk across a few players instead of keeping it locked up in one RHSP. Given the many different moving parts both they and the Padres have and Preller's long relationship with Thad Levine, just about anything with those two clubs seems possible.

Quote from David Jay on November 13, 2018, 12:30 pm

Just to toss it out there... if you're looking for a really off-the-radar trade target, Jose Berrios. The Twins are in a really weird spot after their key young guys took a step backward last year. They may decide to spread their risk across a few players instead of keeping it locked up in one RHSP. Given the many different moving parts both they and the Padres have and Preller's long relationship with Thad Levine, just about anything with those two clubs seems possible.

I like it and the Twins seem to be recognizing 2017 was an illusion as a contender and need a lot of pieces to even contend again in a weak AL Central ... might work.

Would take a ton to get an All-Star 24 year old SP at league minimum with 4 years control BUT he is worth a lot.

Because I happen to believe in Buxton a lot, I don't actually think 2017 was an illusion. As Szymborski noted in his post-mortem, Buxton, Sano and Dozier, whose median projection was somewhere around 10 WAR for the year managed to combine for 0.6 for the Twins.

The Twins have less money on the books than just about any team in the majors, they have a really interesting wave of position players (and BRUSDAR!) about 2 years away in the system, and still have some valuable pieces today. But 2019 is going to be spotty for them and the 2020 rotation looks something like Berrios, Stephen Gonsalves and whatever they overspend to get on the FA market.

Again, they could wind up doing just about anything, which makes it interesting to think about what might emerge from conversations between two old friends who are willing to gamble on talent.

 

I love all the creative ideas!  IMO,  an experienced  front of rotation SP is the team's overriding need; to take pressure off of, and  lead the way by example for the next 3 years for an extremely young staff.  Having someone reasonably capable in front of 4 young SP's makes all 4 of them even better.  Even if some of our many prospects are #1 capable, they won't be that guy the 1st year they arrive.  If we have to "overpay", so be it.  Same dynamic when Pads tried to sign FA position players when PETCO was less fair...

To do this, unlike last 2 years where Pads had a  "what bargain basement innings eaters are out there" approach:   make a list of any MLB SP on the other 29 teams who potentially fits the #1-#3 description.  Then you cross off the guys there's an absolute zero chance of acquiring (given Tatis & Gore are off the table as trade options).  Then you prioritize from who is feasibly available, then you exhaustively explore every single one of those options in order to try to find the best fit of 'value' vs 'ability'.  Pads are #1 system in quality and depth; any excuse to not be able to trade for a frontline starter at the end of the day is that... an excuse.  There HAS to be a team you can make the best prospect quality/quantity offer to.

BUT playing devil's advocate:  I worried years ago that the flaw in Preller's plan (building elite Farm) was that the position players who were going to play prominent roles leading Pads to perennial playoff contender were going to arrive "too far" ahead of the SP's who were going to do the same....   but that was when those position players were: Myers,  Renfroe, Hedges, Margot, Javy Guerra, and Rymer Liriano 🙁

With the Big 3 of elite position player talent (Tatis, Urias, Mejia) now really just "arriving" in 2019, plus another 10 position players ranked #13-#25 arriving mostly 2020-21 in #1 system, does it make more sense to NOT do anything and just let the talent come mostly from within, even if that pushes being competitive out another year+ 🙁 ??   In other words, keep "powder dry" and buy at '19 deadline if team more competitve than expected?  Food for thought.

Quote from fenn68 on November 9, 2018, 10:44 am

Greinke might be a good gamble for the Padres being under control for 3 years (a little worried they are ages 35-36-37 but he appears to be one that remains healthy). He does have a limited no-trade contract (maybe about half the teams ... just don't know who) that could be a benefit or hurdle in making a deal with the Padres.

Padres would not have an issue with picking up the differential in salary between Greinke and Myers and have the prospects to add to the deal without damaging the future.

Given the payroll space ... and IF AZ really wants to pare down payroll .... the Padres could potentially get Greinke without dealing Myers (whose contract may actually detract for AZ making the deal). Greinke is owed about $105MM ... if the Padres would take on the bulk of that contract (which they could) could they get him for bundle of "lesser" prospects like Nix, Avila, Mitchell (all will be on the 40 man) and maybe someone like Naylor ... legit prospect to replace Goldy but no real Padre future. That would preserve Myers / Renfroe / Reyes to another deal to fill other holes.

I cant believe that I didnt think about this facet of a trade with the DBacks when I first suggested a trade for Greinke. I forgot that they could also help us with our 3B issue. Jake Lamb; should he successfully recover from shoulder surgery, would make a nice platoon with CV for SD. He is a FA after the 2021 season should I be reading his contract status correctly, meaning he shouldnt block Potts for too long. His salary was $4.275M last year and shouldnt see much of an increase due to a injury shortened year.

 

Quote from fenn68 on November 13, 2018, 9:30 am

Ian Kennedy .... seriously? ERA's of 4.66 (2018) and 5.36 (2017) and carrying a contract for ages 34 - 35 of $16.5MM - $16.5MM. Yes he is "established" but established as a BAD SP. Padres could do a lot better with that $33MM over the next two years. KC would probably buy Kennedy's bus ticket if the Padres would just take him and his contract and get zip in return.

As for Duffy 's 3 year contract for ages 30 -31 - 32 runs at $15.25 - $15.25 - $15.5MM ... a commitment of $46MM for a pitcher who had a 4.88 ERA in 2018 and ended the season on the DL with a left shoulder impingement. No a good gamble at that cost when the Padres have SP options arriving to this year an in the next couple of years.

Would think the Pads could do better by taking the combined $32MM (2019) and $32MM (2020) and just go for one of the big FA SP (Corbin or Keuchel or Eovaldi) and still have about $10MM leftover .... actually they could pay for Greinke without AZ eating any contract and then unlikely to cost much if anything in prospects.

Kennedy is the incentive for KC to make the deal. I know he is mediocre at best. If Duffy injury is truly serious then no deal obviously as he is the target.  Paying for four or five years of Corbin, Keuchel or Eovaldi is FAR more risky than this deal.

I guess bottom line is i would rather they spend the money/prospects short term to get toward .500 than what I see as a "Hail Mary" when the risk in years 2 -4/5 of the deals for players cited will be high to extreme.  I have little confidence the ownership will actually pony up for a payroll that will support a sustained run. More likely they cite the Hosmer, Myers and Corbin (eg) contracts as reasons they can't spend in 2020-2022. By not adding the "Corbin" contract i hope to force ownership to give AJ a free-er hand when it is really needed while stabilizing the rotation in the interim with contention not out of question.