Outside the box trade

[Horsehide Harry]

Hey, make it a big blockbuster! (never happen in the middle of the season)

Atlanta sends C Johnson, Simmons, AJ Pierzinski

to LA for: Either, Rollins, Seager, Holmes and Barnes

This would be similar to what the Braves did with Arizona in the Toussant trade, taking on salary in exchange for prospect(s). But, in this case real ML talent would be going back the other way. Rollins at short for the rest of the year then he walks OR you bring him back on a make-good deal if you think he can turn it around. Either slots at LF. I might be willing to change Either for Crawford but would have to think about that more.

 

[auyushu]

I think at this point the Braves would be better off going for Quality rather than quantity. By quality I mean upside with some demonstration of ability. So, I wouldn't hold out for a 3 to 1 trade if the right trade came along. Some 1 to 1's I would do (but maybe the other team wouldn't) would be:

Miller to the Dodgers for Seager
Wood to the Cubs from Schwarber
Wood to the RSox for Devers
Wood to the Pirates for Meadows

The only one of those even remotely possible would be the last one with the Pirates. The Cubs wouldn't even move Schwarber for Miller, and the Dodgers have already been saying they won't give up Seager for Hamels or Price, so they definitely aren't moving him for Miller. And the Red Sox just paid 1.5 mil for Devers and have him performing extremely well, don't see them moving him since they will need a 3B themselves in the near future with Panda sucking royally.

The Pirates already have Cutch and Marte, so he is probably movable in the right deal, but who knows.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

The only one of those even remotely possible would be the last one with the Pirates. The Cubs wouldn't even move Schwarber for Miller, and the Dodgers have already been saying they won't give up Seager for Hamels or Price, so they definitely aren't moving him for Miller. And the Red Sox just paid 1.5 mil for Devers and have him performing extremely well, don't see them moving him since they will need a 3B themselves in the near future with Panda sucking royally.

The Pirates already have Cutch and Marte, so he is probably movable in the right deal, but who knows.

Yes but is it Seager PLUS for Hamels or Price? Or just Seager straight up head to head? If I had to guess, it would be the Tigers and Phils are looking for more than just Seager in return.

AND, while I try to be objective and not overvalue Braves players, I will say that Miller has youth, salary, controllability all on his side while Price is a FA after the season and Hamels is expensive with some age. Maybe the Dodgers wouldn't move Seager for Barry Bonds in his prime who knows but he is tradable if they want since Seager is going to be a third baseman and they already have Turner there.

 

[auyushu]

Yes but is it Seager PLUS for Hamels or Price? Or just Seager straight up head to head? If I had to guess, it would be the Tigers and Phils are looking for more than just Seager in return.

No, reports and quotes from Dodgers front office people has them saying they aren't trading Seager or Urias period. Basically they are willing to make a decent package of whatever else they have besides those two, but those two are untouchable. They are basically just looking for pitching that won't cost those two. And you are also ignoring that the Dodgers care about money less than almost any club in baseball.

I was like you, I thought a Miller for Seager deal would make great sense for both teams, but if they aren't trading him they aren't trading him. Otherwise I'd probably try and do a Miller, JJ, and Peraza, and CJ for Seager, Austin Barnes, and Alex Geurrero type of deal.

But their unwillingness to trade those two players would allow for some nice lesser deals if we were willing to move Wood or Julio along with JJ I think.

 

[smootness]

Horsehide, CJ and AJ have very little to no value on the market; in fact, CJ actually has negative value. Simmons is not getting you Seager, Holmes, and Barnes. I mean, I don't even know what to say about that suggestion.

But the Braves aren't trading Simmons, nor should they. I'd also be extremely surprised if they trade Wood.

 

[auyushu]

I'd also be extremely surprised if they trade Wood.

I'll personally be extremely surprised if either Wood or Julio aren't traded by the end of the 2016 season. We have a ton of young pitching, and we are going to need to trade for an impact bat for LF (or possibly 3B), and those two are the most likely trade candidates. I'd rather move Julio, but Wood would make a bunch of sense too.

 

[smootness]

Seager is the #1 prospect in baseball. Nobody's getting him. We certainly wouldn't ever get him for a guy like Miller.

And CJ has no value. I don't know why people keep putting him in trades.

 

[blueagleace1]

Astros - have already said Phillips is unavailable (even for Hamels)

Dodgers - don't personally think Wood nets you Holmes, definitely not both.

Blue Jays - Wood and Johnson MIGHT get you Hoffman or Pentecost. Cunningham has no trade value.

Yankees - Wood and Peraza might get you Judge and Sanchez.

Royals - Wood might get you Holland - he's not getting Almonte thrown in.

Red Sox - Wood might get you Bradley, but I doubt it. Can't see them moving Devers at all (maybe even for Hamels). Hursh has no trade value.

Cubs - Wood might get you Jimenez or Cease, not both. Again, Cunningham has no trade value.

Rangers - Wood might get you Profar, definitely not Profar and Brinson. Texas has more MI and RP prospects than they know what to do with - guys like Castro and Cabrera have little value.



I tend to agree that we'll see one of our young arms dealt and that we'll make a (successful) run at an "Ace" this winter, but Wood most likely nets you ONE Top 10 level prospect in return - everybody's seen what happened this year, and A. J. Prellers don't grow on trees. The above deals are more like what might be reasonable for someone like Hamels, not Alex.

I appreciate and value your opinion and even agree that some of the trades may be overvaluing Wood but I/we just don't know how other clubs value him. To say Cunningham/Castro have no trade value is absurd. Look at the outfield in Toronto (Pillar/Colabello) or Chicago (Coghlan/Fowler) not to mention the fact that he would be a very 4th outfielder for those teams which is something every contender needs to get thru the year and into the playoffs. Same thing can be applied to Castro who could very well start at 2nd base or Shortstop for that matter for the Yankees.

 

[auyushu]

Seaver is the #1 prospect in baseball. Nobody's getting him. We certainly wouldn't ever get him for a guy like Miller.

And CJ has no value. I don't know why people keep putting him in trades.

A guy like Miller? You mean a former #5/6 prospect in baseball who is finally living up to his promise and pitching like a #1 pitcher? And has 3 years of control remaining after this one? As much as some folks vastly overestimate our players, it's amazing how much many folks underestimate them. Miller has a ton of value.

And Seager is definitely in the talks for #1 prospect, but he's anywhere from 1-5 depending on the site. And while he's a great prospect, let's not act like he's on the same level as Bryant or Correa and a surefire stud. He has holes in his game that could easily have him winding up on the same level as his brother (a very solid player, but not something amazing). We aren't talking about Chipper Jones redux here. The Dodgers aren't trading Seager, but Miller is definitely the type of player he could be traded for were they so inclined. Though they'd definitely go for someone like Hamels first most likely as he's more of a sure thing and the Dodgers wouldn't care about the money difference.

As far as CJ goes, most people (outside of a few unrealistic people who do think he has value) put him in trades as a money balancer or as a benefit of the trade itself, not because he has value. Say in a trade with the Dodgers for Alex Geurerro, his and CJ's salaries would balance reasonably well.

 

[auyushu]

To say Cunningham/Castro have no trade value is absurd.

Cunningham is at best a 4th OF, and Castro is at best a utility guy on a good team. They have almost no value as anything other than a throw in as a 4th or 5th prospect in a deal. Neither player was in our top 25 prospects before the season started, and as such have almost no trade value.

 

[blueagleace1]

Cunningham is at best a 4th OF, and Castro is at best a utility guy on a good team. They have almost no value as anything other than a throw in as a 4th or 5th prospect in a deal. Neither player was in our top 25 prospects before the season started, and as such have almost no trade value.

That's my point.. they do have value (very little) but if a team acquiring a premier player (Wood for example) and lack a 4th outfielder or would be of interest in an upgrade then Cunningham is used to net you a greater return. By the way, Cunningham was in our Top 25 prior to the season as he still is.

 

[clvclv]

I appreciate and value your opinion and even agree that some of the trades may be overvaluing Wood but I/we just don't know how other clubs value him. To say Cunningham/Castro have no trade value is absurd. Look at the outfield in Toronto (Pillar/Colabello) or Chicago (Coghlan/Fowler) not to mention the fact that he would be a very 4th outfielder for those teams which is something every contender needs to get thru the year and into the playoffs. Same thing can be applied to Castro who could very well start at 2nd base or Shortstop for that matter for the Yankees.

Pillar, Colabello, Coghlan, and Fowler all bring more to the table than Cunningham - who isn't even a "good 4th OF" on a BAD team in Atlanta. Castro is nothing more than a utility IF at best - if he's a starter at 2B or SS for you, you're in a world of trouble. You realize we can't even be sure Peraza is any better than a super-utility guy until we see him against big league pitching, right?

I love the thought that there's another Preller out there, but he's not running the teams you're talking about dealing with. It's not so much that you're overvaluing Wood so much, it's that you're pretty substantially undervaluing some of the prospects you want in these deals.

You're asking for 3 Top 10 prospects from Toronto - 2 in their Top 5 (and one that has a higher ceiling than Wood that could be ready to step into their rotation in 2016). You're asking for an elite Closer and Top 5 prospect from the Royals (and that prospect has a higher ceiling than Wood). You're asking for a player who projects to be better than any CF in our system not named Maybin and the most powerful 3B in the minors from the Red Sox for Wood and a guy who will be lucky to be a useful RP in the big leagues. You're asking the Rangers for a player not far removed from being the best prospect in the game, a Top 5 prospect, plus another throw-in for Wood, a utility IF (at best), and a RP with a big arm and control issues - the Rangers already have a system loaded with utility IFs and big arm RPs who are better than Castro and Cabrera.

Alex Wood has plenty of value if he's traded, just not the level you're looking at. He'll bring you a Top 10 prospect - one. You're trying to package him with our excess prospects that won't be starters at this level to get multiple Top 10 prospects, and it's not likely going to happen unless you get someone that's both really desperate and not very smart. We'd all be thrilled if you can find that guy, but they're all in Arizona and other places.
.

 

[blueagleace1]

Pillar, Colabello, Coghlan, and Fowler all bring more to the table than Cunningham - who isn't even a "good 4th OF" on a BAD team in Atlanta. Castro is nothing more than a utility IF at best - if he's a starter at 2B or SS for you, you're in a world of trouble. You realize we can't even be sure Peraza is any better than a super-utility guy until we see him against big league pitching, right?

I love the thought that there's another Preller out there, but he's not running the teams you're talking about dealing with. It's not so much that you're overvaluing Wood so much, it's that you're pretty substantially undervaluing some of the prospects you want in these deals.

You're asking for 3 Top 10 prospects from Toronto - 2 in their Top 5 (and one that has a higher ceiling than Wood that could be ready to step into their rotation in 2016). You're asking for an elite Closer and Top 5 prospect from the Royals (and that prospect has a higher ceiling than Wood). You're asking for a player who projects to be better than any CF in our system not named Maybin and the most powerful 3B in the minors from the Red Sox for Wood and a guy who will be lucky to be a useful RP in the big leagues. You're asking the Rangers for a player not far removed from being the best prospect in the game, a Top 5 prospect, plus another throw-in for Wood, a utility IF (at best), and a RP with a big arm and control issues - the Rangers already have a system loaded with utility IFs and big arm RPs who are better than Castro and Cabrera.

Alex Wood has plenty of value if he's traded, just not the level you're looking at. He'll bring you a Top 10 prospect - one. You're trying to package him with our excess prospects that won't be starters at this level to get multiple Top 10 prospects, and it's not likely going to happen unless you get someone that's both really desperate and not very smart. We'd all be thrilled if you can find that guy, but they're all in Arizona and other places.
.

That could be very true, so we'll just agree to disagree. Thanks for the input as your a great poster!!

 

[Horsehide Harry]

Horsehide, CJ and AJ have very little to no value on the market; in fact, CJ actually has negative value. Simmons is not getting you Seager, Holmes, and Barnes. I mean, I don't even know what to say about that suggestion.

But the Braves aren't trading Simmons, nor should they. I'd also be extremely surprised if they trade Wood.

Dodgers DO need a veteran catcher and AJ is probably leading the pack of that particular variety that is available right now. Absolutely, not much value, but some. And yes CJ does have negative value.

BUT, you left out that the Braves would be taking back both Rollins and Either (or Crawford) in the proposed deal which more than corrects for CJ's negative value. Essentially it would be like the Arizona trade a bit where the Braves are taking on some bad contracts in exchange for minor league talent.

Do the Dodgers care about money at all? They certainly don't act that way typically. However, it is true that they have too many outfielders and short of finding a sucker like San Diego aren't likely to move the bad contracts.

The title of the thread was outside the box trades. The one I threw out certainly would be. Will it happen? Very unlikely, as I said in the original thread. Could it happen? I would say yes but the chances would be more likely with a team who was more money conscious than the Dodgers.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

Seager is the #1 prospect in baseball. Nobody's getting him. We certainly wouldn't ever get him for a guy like Miller.

And CJ has no value. I don't know why people keep putting him in trades.

Everyone KNOWS CJ has no value.

He keeps ending up in trades because the Braves have been trying for months now to rid themselves of his contract. If he can be included as part of a deal his negative value will have to be considered as part of the overall package.

Here's an example for you: Miller (big current value) + CJ (medium negative value depending on the team) = Seager (big current value) + Crawford (huge negative value depending on the team)

Keep in mind, I am using the above as an example not what I think might actually happen.

Now, if you ask what I think might actually happen: Maybin (current medium value) + CJ (medium negative value) = low minors, high ceiling prospect who hasn't shown much yet.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

Seager is the #1 prospect in baseball. Nobody's getting him. We certainly wouldn't ever get him for a guy like Miller.

And CJ has no value. I don't know why people keep putting him in trades.

Seager is one of the top prospects in baseball. He also has no current position with the Dodgers since he IS NOT a ss at the ML level, he's a 3B and the Dodgers have Turner in place who is a proven, known quantity at the ML level. Seager is a prospect, which means there is a chance that his talent won't translate to the ML level. That happens with a "can't miss" prospect all the time.

And, you act like that teams NEVER trade these type prospects when the evidence shows differently. It is true that it can be rare. However, big money teams such as the Dodgers are more likely to pull the trigger than smaller teams who have to rely on home grown talent due to monetary reasons and are willing to accept that they will be up and down year to year on winning percentage depending on their current position in a cycle. The Dodgers under current management don't appear to be a team willing to cycle. They want to win every year and will spend to try and make that happen. That spend could come in terms of money but also talent shipped away.

Also, why would the Dodgers openly say "Seager and Urias are available in trade" when that would be terrible negotiating tactics? They wouldn't do that. But this isn't the Twins we are talking about who are not under any circumstances trading Buxton or Sano because of their small market status.

The current Dodgers are like the Stienbrenner Yankees to a certain extent.

You at least ask.

 

[gilesfan]

Seager may be the top prospect in baseball. I highly doubt that they trade Seager with Justin Turner being a 30 year old that hasn't played a full year ever. I also completely disagree that he's either proven or a proven quality.

Atlanta sends C Johnson, Simmons, AJ Pierzinski

to LA for: Either, Rollins, Seager, Holmes and Barnes

The Dodgers don't care about money so they clearly aren't playing any value is saving money from a Either/Rollins trade. In this instance they would receive a catcher that is far inferior to their starter and pretty much on par with their backup. They receive a guy that doesn't benefit them at all in CJ. So, in essence the only value added is the upgrade from Rollins to Simmons....I don't see them giving up the top prospect in baseball + for that.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

Seager may be the top prospect in baseball. I highly doubt that they trade Seager with Justin Turner being a 30 year old that hasn't played a full year ever. I also completely disagree that he's either proven or a proven quality.

Turner has a career .774 OPS and is on track to hit about 25hr this year. Is he the second coming of Chris Johnson? I would say his history doesn't show that. However he has had a lot of missed ML time.

You guys are all full of reasons why the Dodgers WON'T do it. That's the easy approach to take because it is most often right and requires no real thought.

I am saying you ASK and you ask with enticing bait like Miller or Simmons.

It's possible the Dodgers wouldn't trade Seager under ANY circumstance, even for Mike Trout straight up. But, I highly doubt that. So, then it becomes a matter of finding the right bait. Do the Braves have the right bait? I would say it is possible but you have to be willing to part with Miller or Simmons. And I am because the Braves have internal options at short (Peraza and eventually Albies) and have BOTH internal options at SP and cash to shop for one (or two) in the glut of the coming FA market.

My view is that you trade for high end young bats (some will pan out others won't) to fill the holes at the ML level (3B, all OF positions, C) with the goal that those guys be fully ready in 2017 and use current ML talent where their is an excess (Simmons) or replacement options that can come internally or only cost FA money (Miller, Wood, maybe Teheran, JJ, Avilan, Maybin). I also would LOVE to get rid of the current and/or near term dead weight such as CJ and Markakis (and Grilli next year) in effort to reset the payroll where you are paying players for good and appropriate play as opposed to paying players to occupy a space and have a pulse.

 

[clvclv]

Turner has a career .774 OPS and is on track to hit about 25hr this year. Is he the second coming of Chris Johnson? I would say his history doesn't show that. However he has had a lot of missed ML time.

You guys are all full of reasons why the Dodgers WON'T do it. That's the easy approach to take because it is most often right and requires no real thought.

I am saying you ASK and you ask with enticing bait like Miller or Simmons.

It's possible the Dodgers wouldn't trade Seager under ANY circumstance, even for Mike Trout straight up. But, I highly doubt that. So, then it becomes a matter of finding the right bait. Do the Braves have the right bait? I would say it is possible but you have to be willing to part with Miller or Simmons. And I am because the Braves have internal options at short (Peraza and eventually Albies) and have BOTH internal options at SP and cash to shop for one (or two) in the glut of the coming FA market.

My view is that you trade for high end young bats (some will pan out others won't) to fill the holes at the ML level (3B, all OF positions, C) with the goal that those guys be fully ready in 2017 and use current ML talent where their is an excess (Simmons) or replacement options that can come internally or only cost FA money (Miller, Wood, maybe Teheran, JJ, Avilan, Maybin). I also would LOVE to get rid of the current and/or near term dead weight such as CJ and Markakis (and Grilli next year) in effort to reset the payroll where you are paying players for good and appropriate play as opposed to paying players to occupy a space and have a pulse.

If you ask with Miller AND Simmons, they listen. Shy of that, I don't see it.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

If you ask with Miller AND Simmons, they listen. Shy of that, I don't see it.

Ok let's do it.

But, I am going to need 2 other pieces to do the deal. Let's say:

Miller and Simmons for Seager, Holmes and Barnes. I send AJ the other way to backup Grandal