Jump to content
NBC Sports Edge Forums

2017-2018 Off-season and Hot Stove Thread


Recommended Posts

Tampa Bay decides that Brad Miller's 2017 batting average wasn't low enough for them:

 

Quote

Rays acquired INF Ryan Schimpf from the Padres for INF Deion Tansel.

 

Schimpf hit just .158 with a .284 on-base percentage in 53 games with the Padres this past season, but he put up 14 homers and a .424 slugging percentage. The 29-year-old strikes out a ton and hits the ball in the air more than anyone, so putting up a decent batting average will be a struggle, but there's no doubting his power. The Rays are willing to take a chance to see where he could fit.

 

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

JT Realmuto right now  

This doesn't belong here but had no idea where else to put it so people will see it. Tonight (1/30) starting at 7:00pm CST MLB.TV will run a documentary on Tony Gwynn. Should be worth watching as he w

Posted Images

2 hours ago, tonycpsu said:

 

Except we're not talking about a Ryan Howard-esque deal here.  The back end of Stanton's deal is going to suck, but even assuming several years of vaguely replacement-level play at the end and pro-rating that over the years that he's useful, you're talking about a bargain player.  Which means that if this new ownership group is interested in wining, they weren't actually behind the 8-ball at all - -they could have simply kept Stanton and tried to put a competitive team around him.  Yes, that would have meant spending money, but if you're just there to collect profits and not invest in the team, how do you get to call yourselves an investor?  You're basically a rentier at that point just collecting profits through a pass-through entity that happens to play baseball.

 

The most financially savvy move for the Marlins would have been to keep their star player, the one who puts fannies in the seats despite the team's woes.  Instead they did a panic sell-off.  If they didn't have deep enough pockets to wait for their investment to turn a profit, then they shouldn't have bought the team.  Or, more accurately, the MLB shouldn't have accepted the sale.  I'd rather the team die and get taken over by the league the way the NHL did with the Coyotes.  Then at least the focus is on rehabilitating the team instead of liquidating it.

 

I agree to some extent and it's hard for me to know fully what all is going one without an accurate depiction of the Marlins. I agree about potentially not accepting the sale. I will still say this about the contract tho:

 

When you look at what the Marlins have done between Stanton as a long term contract and the new stadium, it's clear they were under the impression that the moves they made would make the team more profitable by about a tier so that they could continue to build. Unfortunately, they've had continual losing seasons and zero playoff revenue coupled with a few more contracts extending in value. I do believe there's a chance the ownership group (the former) simply mistook their market growth when calculating this contract and that it didn't go the way they expected. 

 

And in terms of it not being a Howard-esque deal, I get what you're saying to an extent. But here's where I differ: Giancarlo, at the time of signing, had 2-3 more arb eligible years and the deal is equivalent to some of the highest contracts in all of baseball. It goes from 25-26 for the first couple years to 29 for two years to 32 for three years at the peak before declining back down. It is at 25 Million for 10 Years + a 10 Mill Buyout, and is at 29 Million and above for 6 of those years. According to Wikipedia, there were TEN salaries in baseball in 2017 that were 25+ Million. There were THREE (Price, Greinke, Kershaw) above 29+ Million. Now, maybe the baseball per-year market is about to explode next year with Harper and Machado, but the entire point of signing an extension is that the Marlins risk Giancarlo's career going in a way they do not expect, whether it be by injury, performance, etc., and Giancarlo gets the safety of a MOUNTAIN of guaranteed money... so I guess my point is...

 

WHO THE HELL ARE THEY BIDDING AGAINST?

 

You're telling me (not you, Tony, but the general you), that a 10+1 contract with 275 Million in guaranteed money isn't an open market free agent deal? What'd they think someone else was gonna offer? 400? They assumed ALL the risk, and the reward was that they got him NO MATTER HOW HE PERFORMED. He signed an open market contract without ever having to get remotely close to the open market. The only comparable I can think of is the Kershaw contract, and that covered 6 years of potential free agency as opposed to 11. There's just no upside for the Marlins in that contract. Yes I get that the upside is that they get to keep Giancarlo, but there's no existent contingency if it doesn't work out and it's not significantly less than he'd get on the open market. 

 

And that's not even getting started on the fact that they thought "Oh, this isn't enough, he must need a FULL no trade clause and an opt-out, which further limits are upside because it gives him a point in which he can say "well if I dont' wanna be on this team I can just leave here with no penalty." 

 

Like, I understand it's not equivalent to real life, but I play as a GM on OOTP baseball all the time... and there's times where you negotiate a contract extension for a player and there's a fair value, but then there's times where you look at the figures and you have to say to yourself... "I mean, it's not that I'm not down for this, but there's no advantage to me signing it now as opposed to waiting for the open market, because you aren't giving me any discount against the open market." 

 

BOttom line: If you're going to sign a contract with the length, opt-out, and NTC of the Stanton contract, you HAVE to get a discount on market value. If you're not there's no point in signing it in the first place. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tonycpsu said:

 

Except we're not talking about a Ryan Howard-esque deal here.  The back end of Stanton's deal is going to suck, but even assuming several years of vaguely replacement-level play at the end and pro-rating that over the years that he's useful, you're talking about a bargain player.  Which means that if this new ownership group is interested in wining, they weren't actually behind the 8-ball at all - -they could have simply kept Stanton and tried to put a competitive team around him.  Yes, that would have meant spending money, but if you're just there to collect profits and not invest in the team, how do you get to call yourselves an investor?  You're basically a rentier at that point just collecting profits through a pass-through entity that happens to play baseball.

 

The most financially savvy move for the Marlins would have been to keep their star player, the one who puts fannies in the seats despite the team's woes.  Instead they did a panic sell-off.  If they didn't have deep enough pockets to wait for their investment to turn a profit, then they shouldn't have bought the team.  Or, more accurately, the MLB shouldn't have accepted the sale.  I'd rather the team die and get taken over by the league the way the NHL did with the Coyotes.  Then at least the focus is on rehabilitating the team instead of liquidating it.

How do you build a team IF say your payroll is 90m a year and one player is making close to a third of that amount. The team wasn't very good with him and actually how much worse will it be without him? They lose 5-10 games more than last year? With him did attendance rise last year when Stanton went on a HR tear after the ASB? Though I disagree with the greed premise of trading him, the Marlins ownership is right in that the team needs to be rebuilt from the ground up and that included the front office where people have been let go. If the money they gain by dumping bloated payroll is put back into rebuilding the franchise it will be worth it. But the results won't be known for quite a few years.

 

Building a team through payroll seldom works long term and for a smaller market it never will in my opinion. The revenue doesn't support the payroll. The teams that are winning (Astros, Cubs, Dodgers, Yankees) are being built through the farm system and a few wise investment in FA players. Think about that three of those four teams were among the top five in revenue in 2016. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You make many valid points, @taobball.  Everyone would want a do-over on that one.  My point is given that they already made that bad decision *and* the kind of player Stanton has developed into, it's not a bad baseball contract.  I do, in fact, think MLB salaries will continue to grow, and that, assuming 5-6 more years of Giancarlo doing Giancarlo things, the contract will be reasonable in terms of $/WAR calculations.  That's what should have mattered to the new ownership -- not the downside risk of "what if he tanks", but the upside opportunity of "we have the franchise bat dozens of other teams would kill for and some pieces around him -- let's go win a title."

 

As some other folks pointed out, it's really the Chen and Prado deals that are killing them.  Those guys are contribution little to nothing for the per-annum price of having Giancarlo.  The Stanton contract was risky, but it was defensible.  If his agent played hardball, insisted on no-trade (I remember seeing that Giancarlo needed it in there because of Mami's rep for blowing the teams up) then that was the price to keep a potential superstar at a time when you don't know where the next one will come from.  That it didn't work out -- Jose Fernandez dying, the rest of the pieces not coming together -- doesn't make that one isolated decision wrong, or a risk not worth taking.  I give them credit for trying, for once, to keep a star player, actually.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tonycpsu said:

My point is given that they already made that bad decision *and* the kind of player... 

 

And like I said, I don't have a huge detailed knowledge of the Marlins books at all. I'm just more or less saying that the blame should be pointed at the old FO more than the new FO, which is why I highlighted the above. Maybe Jeter/the FO shouldn't have done what it did. But they were at the least largely handicapped and more so than I think a lot of the media right now is giving them credit for. They're doing what they think is the best for the Marlins in a bad situation. Maybe they are wrong, but they inherited something with some awful problems. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, taobball said:

Maybe they are wrong, but they inherited something with some awful problems. 

 

They *purchased* something with some awful problems.  They did so with a responsibility to understand the assets and liabilities.  You're right that many of those liabilities came from the old owners, but as a baseball fan I don't care, because they have no god-given right to own a baseball team.  They chose to purchase that team, and at that point, they assume the blame for everything they chose to buy.

 

They're basically a private equity firm liquidating an asset to squeeze whatever profit they can out of it.  I feel not an ounce of pity for them.  If I ever feel pity for a baseball owner, then punch me in the face, but if I do, it'll be smaller-market owners who never even get a sniff of a Stanton-like talent to take a chance on.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, tonycpsu said:

 

They *purchased* something with some awful problems.  They did so with a responsibility to understand the assets and liabilities.  You're right that many of those liabilities came from the old owners, but as a baseball fan I don't care, because they have no god-given right to own a baseball team.  They chose to purchase that team, and at that point, they assume the blame for everything they chose to buy.

 

They're basically a private equity firm liquidating an asset to squeeze whatever profit they can out of it.  I feel not an ounce of pity for them.  If I ever feel pity for a baseball owner, then punch me in the face, but if I do, it'll be smaller-market owners who never even get a sniff of a Stanton-like talent to take a chance on.

 

When they won the WS in 2003 they were still 15 of 16 teams in the NL in terms of attendance, actually drew less than year than in 2013 when there was such bad PR after buidling new park, pumping payroll to over 100 Million and then selling off one year later and they got scorched PR wise, and even then they drew better numbers than the 03 WS year.  The reality is that the relationship between that club and the market might be beyond repair.  I think its a good baseball market, just maybe not a great MLB market, I think international EVENTS like the WBC last year was great, but an 81-home game Marlins schedule just isnt gonna draw in that town.  

 

* Mid market-small market teams cant swing and miss and overpay middling type guys, which is what the Marlins did and now they are stuck.  90 Million you can compete even with a Stanton making what he does, the issue is when another 1/3rd of that is paid to 2 guys who you can replace with non-roster invitee fodder and nobody will take off your hands.  

 

* If I ran the team and were forced to trade Stanton, my first call would of been to LA for Puig, he has 1 year left at $6 Million.  

* Any other call would of been - I dont care what you give me, your taking Chen too before that $20 million bomb goes off next year.  Or if they are selling off affordable talent, they better be getting prospects and rid of one of those deals.    Maybe deal with the Giants, send them Ozuna or Yelich and Chen for Matt Moore (who is cheaper) Beede and Arroyo (who is from FLA)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, parrothead said:

Headley?  Seriously and you give the Yankees financial help by taking him back and paying full freight???

The Padres really wanted Mitchell, their GM was just on MLB network, Headley is for only 1 year, they were willing to take that on to get Mitchell

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, azeri98 said:

The Padres really wanted Mitchell, their GM was just on MLB network, Headley is for only 1 year, they were willing to take that on to get Mitchell

"really wanted"  - dont know that much about him, but its not like he has shown much or was a highly touted prospect was he?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, parrothead said:

"really wanted"  - dont know that much about him, but its not like he has shown much or was a highly touted prospect was he?  

Not sure but the Padres gm was just interviewed on MLB and he said he's been trying to get him for 3 years, he's really high on him , the analytics say he will be very good, high spin rate on his pitches. Analytics are good but not the be all end all at least not for me

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly would of rather seen the Pads take on Chen's contract in a trade with the Marlins - and get Yelich.   Pads payroll is pretty low, they need some pitching to bridge until their young upside guys are ready...sign Hosmer, trade for Yelich, put Myers in the OF.  

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, parrothead said:

"really wanted"  - dont know that much about him, but its not like he has shown much or was a highly touted prospect was he?  

 

Not a Pads fan obviously, but AJ Preller gets a lot of leeway in my mind when he makes those kinds of moves. The same as when Beane used to make a move and everyone immediately peeked their interest for what they were getting. If I were a Pads fan I'd be giving Preller the trust on this one. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, taobball said:

 

I don't know about the tag, are you asking me the end question? I mean I really am not defending Jeter for not showing up to the meetings, tho I do believe the Marlins have other executives and in many senses I don't know how many Owners or CEOs show up to the winter meetings in general. 

 

I was just speaking towards the general backlash of the trade. Fans of the marlins can be mad that the Marlins handcuffed themselves to a massive trade without having a great plan to build the team. But if they're looking to shave money off the books they were handcuffed regardless and shouldn't have expected a much better return than what they got when Stanton is refusing to give them a market. 

you had commented on the original post and i thought you might have a educated opinion on the question i was asking.. nothing more.

Edited by osb_tensor
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, parrothead said:

Honestly would of rather seen the Pads take on Chen's contract in a trade with the Marlins - and get Yelich.   Pads payroll is pretty low, they need some pitching to bridge until their young upside guys are ready...sign Hosmer, trade for Yelich, put Myers in the OF. 

 

 

Hosmer will end up costing a lot wherever he goes.  There will be a bidding war.  Red Sox have made him their number one target basically though they are also showing renewed interest in JD Martinez after the Yankees scored Stanton..

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, parrothead said:

Headley?  Seriously and you give the Yankees financial help by taking him back and paying full freight???

im thinking cashman has video evidence of certain GMs doing coke with hookers or something

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, motown magic said:

Hosmers bat plays better at Fenway then JDM . He's younger and will cost less 

 

Will he cost that much less? Maybe a little but the first projection I could pull up said 5/130 (26 per) v 7/160 (23 per). So slightly less per year slightly more years. I don't think cost will be a huge deciding factor.

 

and if what we saw last year out of JDM means anything he plays in every park. His spread is insane. I can't link it cause I'm at work but go look at his espn hittrackeronline overlay. It's impressive as hell.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, motown magic said:

Hosmers bat plays better at Fenway then JDM . He's younger and will cost less 

 

Hosmer plays 1B and Sox thinking of adding a bat to OF as well and trading JBJ.  Doubt that they will get both though.

 

Cubs sign Drew Symly  for 2 year deal and finalize Morrow so their rotation just needs someone like Alex Cobb now. 

 

Rockies sign Bryan Shaw.

 

Phils said close to signing Tommy Hunter.  That would be the second TB reliever to go.  Trade Colome and Fido the Wonder Dog will be the only person left in the Rays bullpen.

Edited by The Big Bat Theory
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, The Big Bat Theory said:

 

Hosmer plays 1B and Sox thinking of adding a bat to OF as well and trading JBJ.  Doubt that they will get both though.

 

Cubs sign Drew Symly  for 2 year deal and finalize Morrow so their rotation just needs someone like Alex Cobb now. 

 

Rockies sign Bryan Shaw.

 

Phils said close to signing Tommy Hunter.  That would be the second TB reliever to go.  Trade Colome and Fido the Wonder Dog will be the only person left in the Rays bullpen.

 

Well Smyly isn't pitching this year I don't beliebebelieve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well according to this he could be ready in the latter half. 

 

Quote

Cubs signed LHP Drew Smyly to a two-year, $10 million contract.

 

Smyly underwent Tommy John reconstructive elbow surgery this past June and probably won't make his Cubs debut until somewhere around mid-to-late August in 2018, but this could prove to be a nice buy-low move for Chicago leading into the 2019 season. Smyly, 28, holds a 3.74 career ERA and 1.199 career WHIP in 156 major league appearances (85 starts). He also has an 8.7 career K/9.

 

But yeah i didn't know it would be until late August that he would be available.  And they still they have him for all of 2019 as well.

Edited by The Big Bat Theory
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...