Trading for Starting Pitching

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
6,441
NJ
67WasBest said:
Still wonder if this means Sale might be available?  They could fix most of their lineup holes with a return for him.
Maybe that one report that white Sox would trade for Shark, then move Sale for a bunch of prospects/players is accurate after all
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
soxhop411 said:
What the hell are the A's doing? Are they trying to tank?
Why would you ask that?  There has been very little doubt that Shark would get traded, either now or mid-season.  Beane has talked about how he needs to re-tool the team.
 
MakMan44 said:
Oh man. I think I'd give up Xander for him. It's not the best idea, but I'm a huge Syndergaard fan. 
He may be a great prospect, but he's just a "pitching prospect."  Hasn't pitched an inning in the bigs. Trading X for him would be insane.
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,310
Rudy Pemberton said:
Yeah, the Sox organization has chunks of Semien in its stool.
I find this interesting. I agree that we've got better players (though Semien's MiL #s are pretty impressive) and I wonder if Billy is choosing the players he wants rather than the best package offered or something like that. 
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,310
Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:
He may be a great prospect, but he's just a "pitching prospect."  Hasn't pitched an inning in the bigs. Trading X for him would be insane.
You're right, of course. Sorry for the asinine post, I just didn't see a deal getting done for Sydergaard without X. 
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,310
Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:
Or maybe the Red Sox aren't offering a package for him.
Probably nothing concrete, but they were discussing him, no?
 
Anyway, I suppose Semien could be the best offer, I just find that a bit hard to believe. Maybe I'm just overvaluing a year of Shark though. 
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,015
Scituate, MA
I really think Chris Sale is the target, if it's with Lester, even better. Best guess, they wind up with Sale and Shields and Swihart and Cespedes are the biggest pieces dealt.
 

BoSoxFink

Stripes
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
7,153
South Park
HangingW/ScottCooper said:
I really think Chris Sale is the target, if it's with Lester, even better. Best guess, they wind up with Sale and Shields and Swihart and Cespedes are the biggest pieces dealt.
why would the White Sox trade for Shark and the turn around and trade away Sale?
 
Jul 15, 2005
438
The Boomer said:
An interesting projection of a simple bases on balls deducted from strikeouts by Jeff Zimmerman at Fangraphs:
 
http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/simple-2015-pitcher-rankings/
 
Phrenelized!
 
By this Projection, relying on Steamer, Ian Kennedy is surprisingly competitive just below Cueto and Wainwright and just above Zimmerman, Fernandez, Samardzija and Salazar according to these predictions.  Cespedes for Kennedy looks good from this perspective.  Buchholz, Kelly and Kennedy (the latter two sounding like Boston pols) wouldn't be bad.  If they can't sign Lester, then a more cost effective free agent or tryouts for the last two rotation spots aren't the end of the world.  Overpaying, particularly for too many years for older pitching, almost never works out.  Lester was a special case but for 7 years and more than $150 million, I'd pass.
The projection above reflects Kennedy's 2014 career best year in Ks; despite that, he still only managed a 92 ERA+ on the season. Moreover this is probably the only perspective from which Cespedes for Kennedy would look good; in terms of overall performance, Kennedy hasn't been a particularly good pitcher since 2011. If the Red Sox are looking for someone who can reignite the rivalry by beaning Ellsbury and co, I guess you'd have to consider Kennedy. Otherwise, avoid.
 

OnWisc

Microcosmic
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2006
4,154
Chicago, IL
BoSoxFink said:
why would the White Sox trade for Shark and the turn around and trade away Sale?
Why would the White Sox trade Chris Sale for a year of Cespedes and Swihart under any circumstances? Sale would have to wander into the press conference with his arm wrapped around the back of his head like when they found Drew's body in Deliverance for that trade to even begin making sense.
 
Jul 15, 2005
438
I don't think you can just dismiss Sale being on the block without knowing what they'll have to give up to acquire Samardzija; the idea may be to downgrade their 2015 ace while improving the rest of the team. However, the price for Sale in those circumstances would make paying Lester or Scherzer for 7 years seem a lot more attractive. 
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,636
BoSoxFink said:
why would the White Sox trade for Shark and the turn around and trade away Sale?
Could be they viewed Semien as someone who won't be terribly useful down the line, traded for Shark to turn him into a first round pick after he leaves via FA.

It's a stretch, but it makes a little sense.
 
Feb 29, 2008
378
Depth matters a lot here. The Red Sox have a lot of it. Chicago does not. 
 
There's probably a 3-WAR downgrade from Sale to Shark, but there might be a 5-6 WAR upgrade from the back of CHW's roster to Cespedes, Betts, etc. Could make sense for both teams.
 
If we're giving up one or two of the three untouchable kids, you have to get back a guy like Sale - top 5 pitcher on a top 5 contract. If the price for gold (Hamels) is too high, maybe just shake your head and go for the platinum. 
 
Feb 29, 2008
378
shepard50 said:
Platinum costs more than gold.
 
Uh, yeah, that's the point I was making. If Hamels is going to cost you one of those elite young guys because Amaro is being insane, pony up a little more and get Sale. Sale is the platinum in this case.
 

soxhop411

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
37,749
“@JonHeymanCBS: deal to send samardzija to the white sox is agreed to”
Take him off the list
 

Hee Sox Choi

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 27, 2006
5,949
Semien, Bassitt (who sucks) + PTBNL for Samarzdija?  I feel like we could have beaten that with Marrero + a shitty back-end SP + whatevs.  Guess it just depends on who that player is.  That's really light for Samarzdija, wow.  What is up with Beane collecting middle infielders?  
 
EDIT: Let me add a little more on Bassitt.  He wasn't in Fangraphs top 25 prospects and was briefly mentioned as someone with bad control and will be better in short stints.  
 
Perhaps the days of spending a lot on a 1-year rental have come to an end.  It would make logical sense that it would.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,162
Not here
HriniakPosterChild said:
 
All the kids are saying that these days. Doesn't it suck to be our age?
 
It kinda does. Old enough to think young folks are dumb, not old enough that you can get away with saying it.
 
I say it anyway.
 
Also, I make the dad noise when I stand up from the couch.
 
And is it me, or did his explanation not actually explain anything? He still can't agree with me and want to sign a top guy in addition to whoever it was I said.
 

FanSinceBoggs

seantwo
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2009
937
New York
Hee Sox Choi said:
Semien, Bassitt (who sucks) + PTBNL for Samarzdija?  I feel like we could have beaten that with Marrero + a shitty back-end SP + whatevs.  Guess it just depends on who that player is.  That's really light for Samarzdija, wow.  What is up with Beane collecting middle infielders?  
 
EDIT: Let me add a little more on Bassitt.  He wasn't in Fangraphs top 25 prospects and was briefly mentioned as someone with bad control and will be better in short stints.  
 
Perhaps the days of spending a lot on a 1-year rental have come to an end.  It would make logical sense that it would.
 
Agreed.  I've always respected Beane, but I'm starting to have some doubts about his decicion-making.  BTW, I've been checking in on an A's fan forum:
 
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=304&f=2062

Some of the posts are absolutely hilarious.  The A's have a disgruntled fan base for sure.  A portion of the fan base supports Billy Beane, and believe he is the greatest thing around.  The other portion of the fan base hates him.  These two perspectives are constantly clashing.  The fans are still debating the Lester and  Samardzija deals from last season (they can't let it go).  They are generally unhappy over losing A.Russell and feel that Beane trades away players (and prospects) without getting enough in return.

I also think the Red Sox could have put together a better package for Samardzija and so why not acquire him?  Is Lester so much better than Samardzija?  Was Lester of 2012-2013, prior to his career year in 2014, so much better than what Samardzija is capable of now?  Why not trade for Samardzija and get the hell out of the Lester bidding, which will most likely be a baneful long term contract.  Of course, maybe the Red Sox know something we don't, i.e., perhaps they can acquire Hamels without giving up Betts or Bogaerts, and thus see Hamels as the backup plan rather than Samardzija.  But if they can acquire Hamels so easily why not do it now?  I'm inclined to think that the Phillies are asking for too much, which is why the Red Sox should have acquired Samardzija. 
 

Darnell's Son

He's a machine.
Dope
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,174
Providence, RI
Hee Sox Choi said:
Semien, Bassitt (who sucks) + PTBNL for Samarzdija?  I feel like we could have beaten that with Marrero + a shitty back-end SP + whatevs.  Guess it just depends on who that player is.  That's really light for Samarzdija, wow.  What is up with Beane collecting middle infielders?  
 
EDIT: Let me add a little more on Bassitt.  He wasn't in Fangraphs top 25 prospects and was briefly mentioned as someone with bad control and will be better in short stints.  
 
Perhaps the days of spending a lot on a 1-year rental have come to an end.  It would make logical sense that it would.
Isn't Marrero at least two years away though? Beane needed to get a starting short stop for 2014 and he thinks Semien fits that bill.

Edit: stupid phone
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
7,273
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Darnell's Son said:
Isn't Marrero at least two years away though? Beane needed to get a starting short stop for 2014 and he thinks Semien fits that bill.

Edit: stupid phone
 
Marrero is 24 and has already had 200+ ABs in AAA. For a shortstop who's calling card is his defense, he's pretty close to the majors.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,074
no matter how good your glove is, a .545 OPS in AAA is pretty far from the majors. he could play as a defensive replacement next season for injuries but it would be hard to find an MLB team that would want to start Marrero anytime next season
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,310
BarrettsHiddenBall said:
Again, GFIN is not incompatible with a Sale trade; downgrade to Samardizja and use the return for Sale to fill your holes.
I mean, when you spell it out, it makes a little bit of sense but how often does this happen? 
 

Merkle's Boner

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2011
2,645
I'm really curious why there seems to be no market for Brock Holt. With his versatility he would strike me as a Billy Beane player. I understand the lack of pedigree but you would think he proved this past year that he can play at the ML level.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Merkle's Boner said:
I'm really curious why there seems to be no market for Brock Holt. With his versatility he would strike me as a Billy Beane player. I understand the lack of pedigree but you would think he proved this past year that he can play at the ML level.
Or maybe the Sox value his versatility, want him as their utility player, and aren't shopping him.
 

czar

fanboy
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
4,193
Ann Arbor
Merkle's Boner said:
I'm really curious why there seems to be no market for Brock Holt. With his versatility he would strike me as a Billy Beane player. I understand the lack of pedigree but you would think he proved this past year that he can play at the ML level.
 
Or teams are actually (likely) showing some interest in him, but realized he played well over his head last year and aren't interested in overpaying for a guy who projects to have between 0 and 0.5 fWAR once his BABIP from last year is regressed.
 

InsideTheParker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
28,997
Pioneer Valley
czar said:
 
Or teams are actually (likely) showing some interest in him, but realized he played well over his head last year and aren't interested in overpaying for a guy who projects to have between 0 and 0.5 fWAR once his BABIP from last year is regressed.
His playing with a concussion really hurt him. I have never heard an explanation of how that happened, how their medical tests failed to diagnose his condition.
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,636
Merkle's Boner said:
I'm really curious why there seems to be no market for Brock Holt. With his versatility he would strike me as a Billy Beane player. I understand the lack of pedigree but you would think he proved this past year that he can play at the ML level.
 
 
Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:
Or maybe the Sox value his versatility, want him as their utility player, and aren't shopping him.
 
 
czar said:
 
Or teams are actually (likely) showing some interest in him, but realized he played well over his head last year and aren't interested in overpaying for a guy who projects to have between 0 and 0.5 fWAR once his BABIP from last year is regressed.
 
Actually...
 
 
Gordon Edes ‏@GordonEdes  8h8 hours ago
Angels have some interest in Brock Holt as shortstop insurance. Farrell today cited his value to Bos as super utility player
 
 

Merkle's Boner

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2011
2,645
Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:
Or maybe the Sox value his versatility, want him as their utility player, and aren't shopping him.
If that's the case, I think it's shortsighted. If middle of the road infielders are getting np you LH sluggers like Moss, or #2 starters like Shark, I'm going to run with Weeks rather than Holt. I just think utility infielders are a hell of a lot easier to replace than sluggers and starters.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
BarrettsHiddenBall said:
Again, GFIN is not incompatible with a Sale trade; downgrade to Samardizja and use the return for Sale to fill your holes.
 
First of all, I don't think they are in GFIN mode. GFIN usually indicates a focus on this season above all else. The moves they have made set them up to be a competitive team for the foreseeable future. Given that, trading Sale makes absolutely no sense. He's arguably the best starter in the AL and on an incredibly affordable contract. He has the most excess value in the sport, and no, I'm not forgetting Mike Trout. Assuming the Samardzija trade goes through as expected, they probably have the best rotation in the American League, perhaps the entire sport. You don't give that away if you aren't rebuilding.
 
Their lineup isn't some wasteland. They have Adam Eaton, Jose Abreu, Adam LaRoche, Conor Gillaspie, and Avisail Garcia as good bets to be above average bats (with Abreu being elite and Garcia having that kind of potential) while Alexei Ramirez, Tyler Flowers and Dayan Viciedo are all very likely to be around league average with Viciedo being young enough that you can still hope for him to exceed that. They really only have one hole in the lineup in Carlos Sanchez, and they can plug that hole in a number of ways that do not require moving the best contract in the entire sport.
 
Sale's name is going to be thrown around because it's a sexy trade scenario. That doesn't mean he's likely to be traded or that it would be a good idea for the White Sox. This is probably going to be the new Giancarlo Stanton around here. Let the white whale go.
 

Pedro 4 99MVP

lurker
Dec 6, 2013
56
Maine
I really think we missed the boat on Shark. I know that none of us are Billy Beane, and maybe he wanted Semien more than any of us can imagine, BUT wouldn't Marrero, Barnes or Ranaudo, and 1 more B level prospect be tough to turn down if you were Beane. Hell, I don't care, make the 3rd player Cecchini, we would still have plenty of prospects, and I don't think Cecchini is in any long term plans. We shouldn't have to wait for Lester, this could have been done anyway. We need 2, and this wouldn't have cost us Cespedes, Owens, other RHP not included in the theoretical Shark offer.
 
So if Lester signs you have a rotation headed by Lester and Shark
If Lester signs elsewhere, you have Shark and plenty of other trade chips to make a 2nd deal.
 
Like I said, maybe we made an offer and Beane loves Semien, but I really think we could have beat the ChiSox offer.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
I wonder to what extent getting another team's #1 prospect matters for ego and marketing, if the alternative players are close in relative value. Any trade with Boston that doesn't include Betts or Owens is going to have the ownership and the fans asking the GM why he gave in and didn't get "the top prospect." So, even if the Red Sox #3 pitching prospect is basically comparable to another team's #1 pitching prospect, a GM may want the White Sox #1 prospect just because it's easier to explain and market.
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
5,627
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
Pedro 4 99MVP said:
I really think we missed the boat on Shark. I know that none of us are Billy Beane, and maybe he wanted Semien more than any of us can imagine, BUT wouldn't Marrero, Barnes or Ranaudo, and 1 more B level prospect be tough to turn down if you were Beane. Hell, I don't care, make the 3rd player Cecchini, we would still have plenty of prospects, and I don't think Cecchini is in any long term plans. We shouldn't have to wait for Lester, this could have been done anyway. We need 2, and this wouldn't have cost us Cespedes, Owens, other RHP not included in the theoretical Shark offer.
 
So if Lester signs you have a rotation headed by Lester and Shark
If Lester signs elsewhere, you have Shark and plenty of other trade chips to make a 2nd deal.
 
Like I said, maybe we made an offer and Beane loves Semien, but I really think we could have beat the ChiSox offer.
 
I think they want to use Cespedes to get SP #2 .. Beane obviously wouldn't be interested in that. Any one of these NL SPs going into their walk year is the probable target. And I'm not sure they are really fond of the idea of trading Marrero for a rental.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
3,503
Portland
According to Joe Frisaro from MLB.com,  Aroldis Chapman could be available. (can't link from work)
 
Would you trade some significant chunks to acquire him with the thought of him starting?  He has two arbitration years left and could obviously dominate in the pen, but he'd be tough to value as a starter. 
 

Doctor G

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 24, 2007
2,323
i would like to see Cueto targeted in the absence of Lester. Cincinnati is in a position where they will almost certainly only be able to retain two of Cueto Latos and Leake. In that Cueto will probably cost at least 23m per year and Latos if he bounces back will be around 16-17 as will Leake, I don't see how they are not making a pretty big gamble by not moving Cueto now for a better package than Latos or Leake will bring. Next winter Cueto and Latos will probably be beyond their budget at over 40 combined whereas L&L will probably only require 34 max. Cespedes Owens and Margot or Marrero might interest them.

Plus the Pedro factor might make extending Cueto more likely as reportedly Cueto idolizes Pedro.
 

Danny_Darwin

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,832
Pedro 4 99MVP said:
I really think we missed the boat on Shark. I know that none of us are Billy Beane, and maybe he wanted Semien more than any of us can imagine, BUT wouldn't Marrero, Barnes or Ranaudo, and 1 more B level prospect be tough to turn down if you were Beane. Hell, I don't care, make the 3rd player Cecchini, we would still have plenty of prospects, and I don't think Cecchini is in any long term plans. We shouldn't have to wait for Lester, this could have been done anyway. We need 2, and this wouldn't have cost us Cespedes, Owens, other RHP not included in the theoretical Shark offer.
 
So if Lester signs you have a rotation headed by Lester and Shark
If Lester signs elsewhere, you have Shark and plenty of other trade chips to make a 2nd deal.
 
Like I said, maybe we made an offer and Beane loves Semien, but I really think we could have beat the ChiSox offer.
Re: Semien v. Marrero, I think there's just a lot to be said for the fact that Semien has held his own at the MLB level, while Marrero hasn't done that yet.