ixiXSolidXixi
Called Up to the Major Leagues
Markakis, Ian Anderson, Pache and Muller should be enough for Stanton?
Bullpen???
- Thread starter clvclv
- Start date
Tapate50
Well-known member
Yeah, we ought to have quality BP arms coming out of our ears the next three seasons. I wouldn't spend there, AT ALL.
This is why I thought it odd that Coppy mentioned 2 additions to Bradley to begin with.
While adding 2 horses for the pen and Frazier would fit financially, it certainly doesn't seem to make sense from an adding "names" standpoint to excite the general fanbase much - unless one of those names was Holland or Davis - I just don't think the typical fan's going to get very excited about adding a 3B that hits .210 and a couple guys who aren't household names since they're not very likely to look at more advanced stats than AVG, HRs, and Saves.
If you're buying a Rio/Camargo platoon (I don't personally) and believe Riley's going to be "the guy" at 3B by 2019 (I could), do you go big-time in the pen and spend the money on Holland/Davis and Reed maybe? I don't, but that'd sure make for one *elluva pen.
It would be an overpay, and the names may not be exact, but that is the type of trade it will take to get Stanton. Lowers the Marlins' payroll, replaces him in the field, and adds a lot of surplus value to their system.
Trades for iconic players like Stanton are always tricky (as we saw with Verlander). I could certainly see the Braves making a horribly lopsided trade to acquire him, unfortunately. The casual fans would cream in their pants, and that's exactly what the Braves FO needs right now.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
I think you could do it differently and still get it done. I think the outlined proposal could do it if you limit it to just Stanton. BUT, the Marlins have more than just a Stanton problem where it comes to payroll. If they do nothing then their payroll looks to be north of $145M. They have made statements saying that they will get to $75M. Does that mean in 2018? Soon? IDK.
But they have a ton of money that can't be moved for any reason like Chen (worst contract in baseball) and Volquez (maybe insured?). And they have a land mark type arbitration case with Ozuna coming.
And I'm not sure that Stanton is a bad deal in any way. If he continues to perform as is he likely opts out which would be great since you lose the late contract obligation (as long as the talent given up is not too significant). If he doesn't opt out, then you likely get great to good production for the next 6-7 years with the negatives starting in years 8-10. However, the cost associated with the supposed bad years in 8-10 would have to be weighed against the talent cost given up to bring him in under normal circumstances (if Stanton was signed for 5 years at $30M per year, his value would be 2x what his value is when he is signed for 10 years at $30M because of the expected drop in value on the later years. People may forget that in 8 years when Stanton isn't good anymore but his talent cost has a value as well. If he can be acquired for a package of $50M prospect value today instead of the $100M it would have taken if his contract was better, then that would have to be weighed against any decreased value seen at the end of the contract - one already devalued by inflationary concerns.)