Quote from Brian Connelly on July 26, 2019, 11:10 am

Quote from fenn68 on July 26, 2019, 7:04 am

Quote from LynchMob on July 26, 2019, 6:50 am

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/kiley-mcdaniel-chat-7-24-19/

1:40	Jason N: Kiley!!  What’s a better use of Kirby Yates:  packaging him with the Wil Myers contract (using the financial flexibility in the off-season to go after an ace), or aiming for even more prospects to add to the pile?

1:42

Kiley McDaniel: In a totally rational/efficient market, it should yield the same benefit. That said, I don’t think teams want to take on negative surplus deals to save flexibility and I wonder if SD would go spend a bunch of money if they dumped Myers deal with all the youngsters coming now? You’d also be selling low on Myers, so I would probably hold him and hope he recoups value.

The way I would go .... adding talent for Yates (especially low cost, long control) should have better long term value to the Padres that what they might add with the extra payroll space by dropping Myers’ contract.

Have to consider that the Padres strength recently has been acquiring (via draft, international signings, trades) young talent that they can develop while their track record of adding “proven” ML talent is not that impressive.

Some academic, since I can’t see any team taking even half of Myers’ remaining contract just to get 1 1/3 years of Yates (and pay him maybe $6MM next year).

Exactly.   Padres would have to redeploy some of the $ savings into a new closer anyway.  Seems like it would take a lot of the  3/35 MM +/- saved just to do that.    Seems more logical & cost effective for the Pads to extend Yates, then maybe attach Myers to a top 100 prospect who's close to MLB (6 yrs control) for $ savings?  But that seems like an offseason deal.

Only possible motivation a team could have for taking on Myers to get Yates would be the combo of: 1) Spending $ not prospects to get Yates, and 2) fact that Myers THIS year would cost little (3 MM salary prorated).  So team could possibly flip Myers again next year to lower payroll they're taking on?

Quote from Brian Connelly on July 26, 2019, 11:15 am

Purely my speculation, but 5 days before trade deadline seems awfully "coincidental" to put Luis Patino on the Temporarily Inactive list, doesn't it?    .... think this indicates at a minimum he is in potential trade talks....

Thor an obvious possibility (Mets thread), but any other ideas?  MLB CF or other OF?

Quote from fenn68 on July 26, 2019, 11:40 am

Quote from Brian Connelly on July 26, 2019, 11:10 am

Quote from fenn68 on July 26, 2019, 7:04 am

Quote from LynchMob on July 26, 2019, 6:50 am

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/kiley-mcdaniel-chat-7-24-19/

1:40	Jason N: Kiley!!  What’s a better use of Kirby Yates:  packaging him with the Wil Myers contract (using the financial flexibility in the off-season to go after an ace), or aiming for even more prospects to add to the pile?

1:42

Kiley McDaniel: In a totally rational/efficient market, it should yield the same benefit. That said, I don’t think teams want to take on negative surplus deals to save flexibility and I wonder if SD would go spend a bunch of money if they dumped Myers deal with all the youngsters coming now? You’d also be selling low on Myers, so I would probably hold him and hope he recoups value.

The way I would go .... adding talent for Yates (especially low cost, long control) should have better long term value to the Padres that what they might add with the extra payroll space by dropping Myers’ contract.

Have to consider that the Padres strength recently has been acquiring (via draft, international signings, trades) young talent that they can develop while their track record of adding “proven” ML talent is not that impressive.

Some academic, since I can’t see any team taking even half of Myers’ remaining contract just to get 1 1/3 years of Yates (and pay him maybe $6MM next year).

Exactly.   Padres would have to redeploy some of the $ savings into a new closer anyway.  Seems like it would take a lot of the  3/35 MM +/- saved just to do that.    Seems more logical & cost effective for the Pads to extend Yates, then maybe attach Myers to a top 100 prospect who's close to MLB (6 yrs control) for $ savings?  But that seems like an offseason deal.

Only possible motivation a team could have for taking on Myers to get Yates would be the combo of: 1) Spending $ not prospects to get Yates, and 2) fact that Myers THIS year would cost little (3 MM salary prorated).  So team could possibly flip Myers again next year to lower payroll they're taking on?

I guess it is a possibility that a team really in contention ... needing a closer ... no prospects to trade that would get a good closer ... the money and cap space ... might make a Yates - Myers (and his contract) deal. Doubt the would think they could flip Myers and I guess would bet on a rebound.

I guess WASH could fit that profile ... plus they have a lot of money coming off the books in 2020 ... and a lot of cash money deferred for Scherzer and Strasburg. Plus not resigning Zimmerman at 1B ... so actually a home for Myers.

Doubt it will go that way but some logic.

Quote from fenn68 on July 26, 2019, 11:48 am

Quote from Brian Connelly on July 26, 2019, 11:15 am

Purely my speculation, but 5 days before trade deadline seems awfully "coincidental" to put Luis Patino on the Temporarily Inactive list, doesn't it?    .... think this indicates at a minimum he is in potential trade talks....

Thor an obvious possibility (Mets thread), but any other ideas?  MLB CF or other OF?

Whit Merrifield and return him to 2B? Urias floats in the INF or is in the deal (his current trade value is plummeting) coupled with Patino and ?????.

An INF of Hosmer - Merrifield - Tatis - Machado for the next 3-4 years could be championship quality ... plus Merrifield is very low cost (3 years plus an option year) and it allows Edwards, Abrams to develop at their own pace as a replacement or makes the move to the OF more logical.

Hope it is not in a deal for Thor ... would be a waste of that level of prospect.

Quote from BoosterSD on July 26, 2019, 11:59 am

Quote from fenn68 on July 26, 2019, 11:48 am

Quote from Brian Connelly on July 26, 2019, 11:15 am

Purely my speculation, but 5 days before trade deadline seems awfully "coincidental" to put Luis Patino on the Temporarily Inactive list, doesn't it?    .... think this indicates at a minimum he is in potential trade talks....

Thor an obvious possibility (Mets thread), but any other ideas?  MLB CF or other OF?

Whit Merrifield and return him to 2B? Urias floats in the INF or is in the deal (his current trade value is plummeting) coupled with Patino and ?????.

An INF of Hosmer - Merrifield - Tatis - Machado for the next 3-4 years could be championship quality ... plus Merrifield is very low cost (3 years plus an option year) and it allows Edwards, Abrams to develop at their own pace as a replacement or makes the move to the OF more logical.

Hope it is not in a deal for Thor ... would be a waste of that level of prospect.

Does KC really need Urias? Dont they have Mondesi at SS who is young. But I just looked and maybe they are light on 2B and CF prospects which is why they are playing under performing kids at 2B and Merrifield at CF. So it would probably take Patino, Urias, Naylor, and 1 other decent prospect to get it done. Or could SD substitute a lesser prospect for Patino and take on the contract of Kennedy to even out the deal?

Quote from fenn68 on July 26, 2019, 12:13 pm

Quote from BoosterSD on July 26, 2019, 11:59 am

Quote from fenn68 on July 26, 2019, 11:48 am

Quote from Brian Connelly on July 26, 2019, 11:15 am

Purely my speculation, but 5 days before trade deadline seems awfully "coincidental" to put Luis Patino on the Temporarily Inactive list, doesn't it?    .... think this indicates at a minimum he is in potential trade talks....

Thor an obvious possibility (Mets thread), but any other ideas?  MLB CF or other OF?

Whit Merrifield and return him to 2B? Urias floats in the INF or is in the deal (his current trade value is plummeting) coupled with Patino and ?????.

An INF of Hosmer - Merrifield - Tatis - Machado for the next 3-4 years could be championship quality ... plus Merrifield is very low cost (3 years plus an option year) and it allows Edwards, Abrams to develop at their own pace as a replacement or makes the move to the OF more logical.

Hope it is not in a deal for Thor ... would be a waste of that level of prospect.

Does KC really need Urias? Dont they have Mondesi at SS who is young. But I just looked and maybe they are light on 2B and CF prospects which is why they are playing under performing kids at 2B and Merrifield at CF. So it would probably take Patino, Urias, Naylor, and 1 other decent prospect to get it done. Or could SD substitute a lesser prospect for Patino and take on the contract of Kennedy to even out the deal?

Don't see SD taking on money ... KC is angling for a lot since they too don't have an urgency to trade Merrifield NOW being controlled for 4 years on a very, very club friendly deal ... and he is good and productive.

KC probably wants pitching as a focal point ... but could see either Renfroe or Reyes adding a lot to a package and maybe bundled with a L.Allen, Quantrill could limit giving up top prospects.

The one "concern" with Merrifield is that he is 30 so the window of control is age 31-34 and when does the production drop off?

Quote from fenn68 on July 26, 2019, 2:24 pm

On the Syndergaard front:

====

Joel Sherman of the New York Post reports that the Mets are seeking an MLB-ready starter who can step right into the rotation in place of Syndergaard, then some additional high-end prospects after that. The pitcher in question needn’t technically be the headliner in the deal, but presumably the Mets are eyeing a controllable (pre-arbitration) starter as well as premier minor leaguers beyond that point.

That aligns with recent reports from SNY’s Andy Martino (Twitter links), who suggests that the Mets view the Padres, Braves, Dodgers, Rays and Yankees as the best on-paper fits in a deal. The Padres and Braves, in particular, are rich with MLB-ready pitchers in the upper minors, and Sherman lists that pair of organizations as the two that the Mets feel are best-positioned to work out a deal.

======

Well the ML starter back to the Mets fits about all the Padres SP. Paddack and Lucchesi should be totally off the table ... probably Lauer too (even though not liked by some). Might one of Lamet, L.Allen, or Quantrill fill that Met need for a replacement SP? Remember Allen is a Top 100 prospect (#73) and Quantrill was at one point. Using either should lower the quality of the 2nd and 3rd pieces in the deal.

Wonder if putting A.Allen in the deal helps after seeing Ramos and Nido catching in the last series ... Mets really need help there. Mets apparently want to be good next season with DeGrom, Rosario, Alonso et. al ... so maybe more near term players work ... L.Allen (#73) for pitching, A.Allen for catching, France for 3B (replacing Frazier) ... then add a 4th piece but not prime prospect ... might work if the competitors for Syndergaard are not ponying up more (better). NYM can ask .. other don't have to give.

Preller is bidding against other teams not only with the Mets ... so go to a Preller comfort level for the top ... hold his ground ... see if any other team can (or will) out bid him. If not ball is in the Mets court. Padres world does not end if the deal does not get done ... it may end if Syndergaard in this years Myers' deal.

Quote from fenn68 on July 26, 2019, 5:01 pm

Our good Padre buddy Buster Olney is reporting that the Padres are willing to move Morejon to get a front line pitcher.

Not sure how much more the Mets would want for Syndergaard IF Olney’s report is valid.

Quote from MrPadre19 on July 26, 2019, 6:48 pm

The bottom line is we could have Thor if we wanted him.

Theres no way anyone else could beat a package from the Padres IF AJ wanted him bad enough.

It just comes down to what AJ feels is too much to give.