Forum
Forum Navigation
Ranking offseason priorities
#21 · November 24, 2019, 4:46 am
I guess the selling GMs have to try to start the bidding high just to identify the really interested parties ... drop the demands if the buyers don’t show and the ones that do are making low ball bids ... get more competition.
All situations are different so hard to generalize. Think most GM don’t feel the have to make the deal if it does not make their value analysis criteria and each GM has their own tools for valuation of the players involved and alternatives not specific to the deal.
These short term / high salary players (Lindor, Betts, etc) may have high value from an isolated analytics standpoint ... but that does not mean 29 other teams have any interest in paying the price ... if the team is a non-contender or has payroll conditions. Then even a contender has to have a need at that position ... a desire to make that player a priority ... and the trade chips that they are willing to use to make the deal. Whew .... all that should either kill any trade or the seller has to really drop the price.
Agree that prospect assets have soared in the valuation analysis (long control / low cost). The blue chip prospects also give a high value ceiling potential that few veteran trade targets sill possess since the are often on the downside of their value arc.
Boston is a unique situation with “needing” to dip below the luxury tax level before some of the heavier penalties kick in but burdened with multiple very high price pieces that may be just hard to find takers for given the cost / control let alone expect a quality return. Think Boston .... at some point ... will have to focus on finding buyers that will take the contracts and forget about returns. (Sort of their version of making a Wil Myers deal).
Preller is in a good position with his slate of prospects. With other teams either not having a major inventory of quality prospects and / or not willing to deal them ... we probably should consider the value of some of the less hyped prospects as having more trade value than we normally consider. Basically scarcity of good prospects being offered in trades ups the value of the ones that are in play. Maybe players like Bolanos, Cantillo, Weathers, etc will get deals done for veterans that teams are willing to move for prospects.
Additionally, would guess that Preller is not going to force a deal for any specific target ... rather sort among alternative targets and find the value ... in his analysis ... which may avoid utilizing any of his blue chippers.
Since I am in the 2020 long shot to contend camp .... Preller should be focusing his trade chips on targets with some longer term value and as a corollary he not use some of his better trade chips now (for marginal return value) and “hold them” to be dealt as better alternatives surface (trade deadline / next winter) when the Padres’ needs may become more specific.
#22 · November 24, 2019, 2:36 pm
Agree that prospect assets have soared in the valuation analysis (long control / low cost). The blue chip prospects also give a high value ceiling potential that few veteran trade targets sill possess since the are often on the downside of their value arc.
Think prospects are finally beginning to be valued more "correctly"... always thought there was, and still is, to an extent, a weird disconnect between really limited but "MLB" guys like #4-5-6 SP's (multiple names available at Est 8 MM/yr for multiple years), and how a prospect is valued in trade. It basically used to be that WAY too much subjective premium was put upon having "established" in MLB... it's actually part of the reason I propose putting
... beginning to change now with the position player deals in last 1-2 years getting signed increasingly early in guys' careers. Think the analytics are getting better. So guy like Evan White for M's they figure, 70 grade Fielder plus what he did with bat in AA is highly likely to provide value at the deal they did. Secures player's financial future against injury/poor performance and team gets financial certainty & major future savings vs. what they could earn in early FA years.
#23 · December 2, 2019, 8:32 am
Quote from Brian Connelly on November 22, 2019, 10:17 am1-3: MUST/NEED 4-5: “SHOULD”/Would really help 6-7: Luxuries
- A frontline starter with 3+ years control FA Don’t see the TR?
1A. Trade of Myers (+ MLB SP + prospect/s)? (TR out)
- A lefty-hitting outfield platoon option FA (C. Dickerson) / TR
- A reliable VETERAN reliever for the middle innings FA (Stammen or ?) / TR
- An everyday outfielder who hits both lefties and righties TR (NOT Castellanos or Ozuna)
- Depth starter = Another Reliever (IF MLB SP traded) TR/FA (No 8 MM AAV)
5A. Trade of either Lauer or Lucchesi (Arb eligible next yr) (TR out)- A second baseman TR/FA
- A catcher that’s better Off/Def balanced than Mejia/Hedges TR 7a ( TR C out)
One thing that jumps out to me is that what I have as the 3 biggest needs are Only or better available in FA; #4 - 7/8 are Only or better available in Trade
Well, the recent moves took care of items # 2, 3, & 5 on the list, but by trading Urias increased the need for a 2B from a "luxury" to a "should" (in my judgement due to in-house options). Grisham COULD develop into the mythical "everyday OF who hits both LH & RH well", but don't think anyone has him pegged as that in 2020. Both Pomeranz & Davies are far better options than I envisioned for those respective needs.... my pleading Manifesto to ownership next post....
#24 · December 2, 2019, 9:37 am
I am simultaneously extremely encouraged by the recent moves but massively frustrated by the "artificial" ceiling/limitation being reported that Preller must deal with despite the blustery Dilbert CEO "win now" mandate...
Encouraged because there is room/$ to work with for just a few remaining "needs". Frustrated because the Padres are VERY close to being as complete a team as possible, but would have to 'slightly' exceed 140 MM to get "all the way" there.
The Padres current ACTUAL payroll for 2020 is: 130 MM Includes: Dead $, buyouts, ACTUAL 2020 salaries (NOT AAV's or prorated to include past signing bonuses), Estimated Arb salaries, and 600K x # of "minimum" salary guys needed to fill out 25-man roster. Of the 50 MM total in Signing Bonuses to: Machado, Myers, Hosmer, Brad Hand, & now Pomeranz; ALL but Pom's (none) has been paid. I'm assuming Pom gets MM /yr in S.B. yearly on 11/15 , so 2020 = 4 salary + 2 S.B. = 6 MM to Pom
Now let's fill each of the remaining "Must" & "Should" needs with best case options looking at 2020 salary: 1) TOR SP: Sign Cole or Stras with 1st yr salary (<AAV) of: 25 MM, 1a) Trade out Myers with 40-man/MLB SP & prospect/s to save: 15 MM, 4) Everday OF: Sign Corey Dickerson or Trade for Marte (Margot in trade back): 8 MM Net, 6) 2B: Sign Villar or Howie Kendrick: 7 MM..... This is a 2020 & next 5 years contending team with no discernible major needs anywhere in 20 & 21 with still a top 5-10 Farm System for "only": 155 MM... only 15 MM above the high end of the "allowable" range. This 15 MM in this scenario is 100% allocated to the 2 year veteran "band aids" in OF & 2B.
SUMMARY: Preller does not need to spend 175-200 MM to get to a realistic contending team with potentially dominant Pitching. Ownership should allow the mandated to win now Preller to have the best chance of doing so with a sustainable 155 MM payroll that is only about 10% above the "limit" prescribed to take advantage this year's strong FA SP market so there is a proven playoff ace fronting the rotation taking pressure off & protecting younger SP's to more gradually develop into those roles.
If they will not allow the payroll to exceed 140-150, Preller should still try to sign a TOR SP in conjunction with a Myers + ? trade out, then bargain basement hunt for help @ 2B & OF.
#25 · December 2, 2019, 10:11 am
A triage question ... the critical piece to get this all done is trading $15MM of Myers' contract ... that has to be done first before committing other monies? Given the failure to move his contract over the past year ... no guarantee that will happen after the new commitments (or may cost a lot more in prospects than is justified).
Since the TOR FA arms are likely to drag their feet in signing ... time works for Preller to dump Myers ... and getting a lower 2020 offset by higher out years should be negotiable. How long does Preller wait (and how much is the top) for signing one of the TOR FA? Others are bidding. We looking at long term deals with maybe $32-35MM AAV?
Then for upgrades at the other spots ... that may be a function of who is really available combined with the prospects lost to move Myers and the cash in 2020 to sign the TOR. The trade option (Marte, Conforto) players will require prospects the buyer wants and will come with contracts. The FA are just the dollars ... but will they be around when the Myers / TOR issue is settled.
So a Myers to TOR to position upgrades sequence unless it becomes clear to Preller (at some point) that the Myers or the expensive TOR option is not coming together. If he wants to make the team better (more competitive) in 2021-21 and is a bit constrained by payroll at the new upper limit ... he has to continually shift gears as alternatives dry up over the course of the winter.