PDA

View Full Version : Sox & Dodgers Blockbuster Trade?


Fastball23
06-25-2013, 08:59 AM
Jim Bowden of ESPN.com and SiriusXM (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/the-gms-office/post?id=6921) dicussed yet another Ethier trade rumor this morning:
“Ethier and $5 million, Pederson, Gordon, Magill and Withrow to the Chicago White Sox for Jake Peavy, Alexei Ramirez and Jesse Crain.”
http://www.dodgersnation.com/dodgers-rumors-andre-ethier-for-alexei-ramirez-and-jake-peavy/2013/06/19

GoSox2K3
06-25-2013, 09:22 AM
What's The Score?

Fastball23
06-25-2013, 09:30 AM
Withrow throws over a 100 mph.

Golden Sox
06-25-2013, 09:47 AM
1) Will LA take Dunn in the package?
2) If we get Ethier in the trade, where does that put the Tank? Maybe Hahn is working on another deal also.
3) Does anybody know anything about the other players mentioned who might be coming to the White Sox?

Frater Perdurabo
06-25-2013, 09:58 AM
1) Will LA take Dunn in the package?
2) If we get Ethier in the trade, where does that put the Tank? Maybe Hahn is working on another deal also.

I would imagine Rios would be the next to go. Or, if we could magically move Dunn or Konerko, Viciedo could DH.

CHISOXFAN13
06-25-2013, 09:59 AM
Pederson having a fantastic season in AA.

PorkChopExpress
06-25-2013, 10:14 AM
Didn't Hanley Ramirez just get back for the Dodgers? Why would they want Alexei? Unless they would move Hanley to 3B again. I don't know, but it doesn't seem like a great fit for LA.

Fastball23
06-25-2013, 10:17 AM
I would imagine Rios would be the next to go. Or, if we could magically move Dunn or Konerko, Viciedo could DH.

The Yankees might have interest in Konerko.

Moses_Scurry
06-25-2013, 11:04 AM
Am I missing something here? Isn't Ethier pretty much not all that good? And he's being paid a ton through 2017! 5 million seems like a pretty light cash addition.

EMachine10
06-25-2013, 11:44 AM
Am I missing something here? Isn't Ethier pretty much not all that good? And he's being paid a ton through 2017! 5 million seems like a pretty light cash addition.
He's been a pretty nice player the past several years, but is having a down year now. He is being paid quite a bit of money, and not exactly who I would want in return if some form of retooling is on its way. The prospects seem decent, but I would just as soon leave Ethier out of the deal. Of course, the Dodgers want him out to make room for everybody in the OF.

Huisj
06-25-2013, 12:07 PM
Didn't Hanley Ramirez just get back for the Dodgers? Why would they want Alexei? Unless they would move Hanley to 3B again. I don't know, but it doesn't seem like a great fit for LA.

And not to mention Uribe is playing better than Alexei anyway.

doublem23
06-25-2013, 12:18 PM
He's been a pretty nice player the past several years, but is having a down year now. He is being paid quite a bit of money, and not exactly who I would want in return if some form of retooling is on its way. The prospects seem decent, but I would just as soon leave Ethier out of the deal. Of course, the Dodgers want him out to make room for everybody in the OF.

Ethier definitely could be one of those guys I'd be willing to take a flyer on and hope that he just needs to get away from Mattingly (who he's been butting heads with most of this season), but yeah, that is a lot of contract to take on. I'm not sure I'm interested in the Sox rolling the dice on a guy whose signed through 4 more years through age 35.

Moses_Scurry
06-25-2013, 12:34 PM
Ethier definitely could be one of those guys I'd be willing to take a flyer on and hope that he just needs to get away from Mattingly (who he's been butting heads with most of this season), but yeah, that is a lot of contract to take on. I'm not sure I'm interested in the Sox rolling the dice on a guy whose signed through 4 more years through age 35.

That's my thinking. If there were more cash coming with him or if they were taking Dunn off our hands I'd feel differently. I guess if the prospects are good it might be an equalizer, but I don't know enough about them.

kobo
06-25-2013, 12:39 PM
Ethier definitely could be one of those guys I'd be willing to take a flyer on and hope that he just needs to get away from Mattingly (who he's been butting heads with most of this season), but yeah, that is a lot of contract to take on. I'm not sure I'm interested in the Sox rolling the dice on a guy whose signed through 4 more years through age 35.
Unless LA is going to pay half of what Ethier is owed I don't want him on the Sox. That is not a contract the Sox should have any interest in trading for.

Foulke You
06-25-2013, 03:21 PM
Unless LA is going to pay half of what Ethier is owed I don't want him on the Sox. That is not a contract the Sox should have any interest in trading for.
Ethier is a solid left handed stick and definitely could benefit from being in a smaller ballpark and change of scenery but you are right, that contract is just terrible. However, the Dodgers just might be willing to eat a nice chunk of that since they haven't been shy about spending tons of cash. Puig pretty much makes Ethier the odd man out and other GMs have to know that.

ND_Sox_Fan
06-25-2013, 04:57 PM
If the trade comparison is about the money, Ethier is owed $69 million from 2014 through 2017, while Alexei and Jake are owed a combined $60 million from 2014 through 2016 (Jake through '15 and Alexei through '16).

Further, the full-year contracts for these players are $13.5 for Ethier this year, while Jake is taking home $14.5 and Alexei $7.

Therefore, using any likely proration period, the money in the contracts over the lifetime are roughly equal (especially with the $5 million sent to the Sox).

Anyone taking the Alexei contract is certainly eating a liability, and while Jake might offer some real value over the next two seasons, he will likely not be the deciding factor in the Sox's ability to contend over that time.

TheVulture
06-25-2013, 05:24 PM
I see Ethier has won a gold glove. I have to admit I haven't seen enough of him to gauge his defensive abilities...is that a legit gold glove win, or another BS pick? Considering he's not a Derek Jeter type, I would think its legit, but I don't know. Anyone with some insight on his defense?

Seems questionable the Dodgers would be interested in trading for a pitcher on the DL, but hey KW did it, so who knows.

TheVulture
06-25-2013, 05:30 PM
If the trade comparison is about the money, Ethier is owed $69 million from 2014 through 2017, while Alexei and Jake are owed a combined $60 million from 2014 through 2016 (Jake through '15 and Alexei through '16).

Further, the full-year contracts for these players are $13.5 for Ethier this year, while Jake is taking home $14.5 and Alexei $7.

Therefore, using any likely proration period, the money in the contracts over the lifetime are roughly equal (especially with the $5 million sent to the Sox).

Anyone taking the Alexei contract is certainly eating a liability, and while Jake might offer some real value over the next two seasons, he will likely not be the deciding factor in the Sox's ability to contend over that time.

Good breakdown.

As for Alexei, I'm not sure it is certain that that would be eating a liability. His tools don't seemed to have diminished, only his execution. He still makes fantastic plays and turns the double play well, his arm is still there and he's running the bases as well or better than ever. If I was looking for a guy to score from first, I'd take Ramirez every day of the week. I wouldn't be surprised if he bounced back with a change of scenery.

blandman
06-25-2013, 05:42 PM
Withrow throws over a 100 mph.

Yeah, but why are we acquiring relievers?

And saying Magill has control problems would be being incredibly nice.

Ethier definitely could be one of those guys I'd be willing to take a flyer on and hope that he just needs to get away from Mattingly (who he's been butting heads with most of this season), but yeah, that is a lot of contract to take on. I'm not sure I'm interested in the Sox rolling the dice on a guy whose signed through 4 more years through age 35.

Yeah, they'd have to give us a ton more in prospects for this to make sense. Unless the team thinks Either could break out and then be dealt for more prospects. Certainly isn't in the future plans given his age.

ND_Sox_Fan
06-25-2013, 05:43 PM
Acquiring Ethier at this time reminds me of when the Sox got Rios in 2009. Prior to this season for Ethier and '09 for Rios, each annually hit in the .290s with OBPs around .350 (Ethier slightly higher). The difference is that Ethier has a little more power where Rios has the ability to steal more bases. In 2009, Rios hit .264 with a .317 OPB for Toronto (108 games), while Ethier is hitting .252 with a .335 OPB this season for LAD (72 games).

I say this from a position of comparing stat and story lines, as I haven't been able to see Ethier play much this year.

TheVulture
06-25-2013, 06:00 PM
Yeah, they'd have to give us a ton more in prospects for this to make sense. Unless the team thinks Either could break out and then be dealt for more prospects. Certainly isn't in the future plans given his age.

With all the salary the Sox would give up, they'd have to take on a player such as Ethier I'd imagine.

Amongst the prospects here we have the Dodger's top rated hitting prospect, their closest rotation prospect and a potential closer. With Peavy on the DL and Ramirez's questionable play of late, how much can you expect?

If the Sox end up trading Rios, we'll have a somewhat comparable player to replace him, numerous quality prospects (ok, I see you don't think much of Magill but Sickels had him rated B- preseason) and a reduced payroll. Sounds like a pretty good start to me.

TheVulture
06-25-2013, 06:15 PM
Just reading an article on Mike Scioscia's Tragic Illness (the website), even while trashing Brown, it still seems he's considered to have upside...so who knows, maybe he might still have value for us too.

TheVulture
06-25-2013, 06:44 PM
Just reading an article on Mike Scioscia's Tragic Illness (the website), even while trashing Brown, it still seems he's considered to have upside...so who knows, maybe he might still have value for us too.
Oops, I meant Gordon not Brown.

cards press box
06-25-2013, 07:15 PM
Amongst the prospects here we have the Dodger's top rated hitting prospect, their closest rotation prospect and a potential closer. With Peavy on the DL and Ramirez's questionable play of late, how much can you expect?

And the other prospect is Dee Gordon (http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=strang001dev) a 25 year old, left handed hitting, speedy shortstop who hit well and stole a lot of bases in the minors. This deal, if it happens, sounds like it adds young talent to the organization as well as a good lefty hitting outfielder in Ethier and may provide some salary relief, too.

That does not sound like a bad start to the Sox rebuilding efforts this year.

Tragg
06-25-2013, 07:37 PM
With all the salary the Sox would give up, they'd have to take on a player such as Ethier I'd imagine.

Amongst the prospects here we have the Dodger's top rated hitting prospect, their closest rotation prospect and a potential closer. With Peavy on the DL and Ramirez's questionable play of late, how much can you expect?



First, we can wait until Peavy gets off the DL and get his value up. After all, we traded for him while he was on the DL.
How do these prospects rate among the best in baseball? Is the Dodger system good?
Strange that they're sending us money when they're taking all that payroll.
Sox love hard throwers. Hope his pitches have some movement.

DSpivack
06-25-2013, 07:41 PM
Why are they sending us money? I would assume those prospects are extremely highly rated. Ethier has little value at all.

The Sox love hard throwers.

As you said, Ethier has little value. If they want someone to take on his contract, they'll have to pay part of it.

I don't know about the other 3 prospects, but Dee Gordon isn't much. He's 25 and with over 600 PAs in the majors his OPS is barely over .600.

DrCrawdad
06-25-2013, 07:47 PM
When I hear Dodgers-Sox trade, I think of the KW Baldwin-to-Dodgers trade and the Berry/Barry mess (http://www.baseballamerica.com/online/news/010726baldwin.html).

Tragg
06-25-2013, 07:58 PM
As you said, Ethier has little value. If they want someone to take on his contract, they'll have to pay part of it.

I don't know about the other 3 prospects, but Dee Gordon isn't much. He's 25 and with over 600 PAs in the majors his OPS is barely over .600.

That makes it a marginal deal, probably. Crain is worth 1 top 100 prospect, Peavy if healthy at least 2, and Alexei is probably worth 1.
And then we have to take Ethier. Rather have a real prospect than the money.
Why take Dee Gordon?
Looks like a Williams trade.

DirtySox
06-25-2013, 08:39 PM
That makes it a marginal deal, probably. Crain is worth 1 top 100 prospect, Peavy if healthy at least 2, and Alexei is probably worth 1.
And then we have to take Ethier. Rather have a real prospect than the money.
Why take Dee Gordon?
Looks like a Williams trade.

Yep. Pretty terrible.

doublem23
06-25-2013, 10:31 PM
That makes it a marginal deal, probably. Crain is worth 1 top 100 prospect, Peavy if healthy at least 2, and Alexei is probably worth 1.
And then we have to take Ethier. Rather have a real prospect than the money.
Why take Dee Gordon?
Looks like a Williams trade.

I can't imagine Alexei Ramirez right now would fetch a Top 500 prospect straight up.

I have no idea where you could possibly even gauge these numbers right now.

blandman
06-25-2013, 11:13 PM
I can't imagine Alexei Ramirez right now would fetch a Top 500 prospect straight up.

I have no idea where you could possibly even gauge these numbers right now.

The guy on MLBTR threw those numbers out during his "chat" today. I'm pretty sure they came from his ass. I like the site as a resource of other people's works, but the staff their really needs to leave the analysis to professional baseball writers.

doublem23
06-25-2013, 11:25 PM
The guy on MLBTR threw those numbers out during his "chat" today. I'm pretty sure they came from his ass. I like the site as a resource of other people's works, but the staff their really needs to leave the analysis to professional baseball writers.

I could see Crain and Peavy drawing that kind of interest if the market proves to be very buyer heavy, but it's hard to get a good gauge of their value without any moves having been made yet.

The best I think we can do for Alexei is swap him for an older prospect that may have worn out his welcome where he is an maybe a reclamation project for the Sox. Maybe someone like a Dee Gordon. You're not getting top talent for a guy whose been steadily regressing for 4 years and still has 2 left on his contract.

blandman
06-26-2013, 12:14 AM
I could see Crain and Peavy drawing that kind of interest if the market proves to be very buyer heavy, but it's hard to get a good gauge of their value without any moves having been made yet.

The best I think we can do for Alexei is swap him for an older prospect that may have worn out his welcome where he is an maybe a reclamation project for the Sox. Maybe someone like a Dee Gordon. You're not getting top talent for a guy whose been steadily regressing for 4 years and still has 2 left on his contract.

I'm not a Dee Gordon fan, but you're right he's exactly the kind of guy you'd get for Ramirez.

I still don't see how we're trading an injured Jake Peavy to another team without trading them Kenny Williams first.

Tragg
06-26-2013, 02:47 AM
I can't imagine Alexei Ramirez right now would fetch a Top 500 prospect straight up.

I have no idea where you could possibly even gauge these numbers right now.

It's my estimate based on what I've seen other teams get for similar players (not what the Sox have been getting for ours the last few years when we basically gave productive players away).

I agree that Alexei wouldn't yield a top 100 player, but since we have no other SS, I figure we'd need a good prospect to deal him. Maybe that's where Dee Gordon comes in - not a great prospect but he can play SS. And the Dodgers have a big need for a SS - they may think they can fix Alexei and overpay, just as Williams has done before (and he often did fix them).

doublem23
06-26-2013, 07:33 AM
I still don't see how we're trading an injured Jake Peavy to another team without trading them Kenny Williams first.

Because teams need pitching. Peavy's been one of the best pitchers in the American League the past 2+ seasons now and the injury he's coming back from now, as far as I know, is not related to either his mechanics or his lat injury from several years ago. If his elbow was bugging him, then yeah, that's one thing. But a rib fracture seems like the kind of thing that once it's healed, it's water under the bridge.

But it's still hard to read the market from the outside until a move or two are made.

blandman
06-26-2013, 12:55 PM
Because teams need pitching. Peavy's been one of the best pitchers in the American League the past 2+ seasons now and the injury he's coming back from now, as far as I know, is not related to either his mechanics or his lat injury from several years ago. If his elbow was bugging him, then yeah, that's one thing. But a rib fracture seems like the kind of thing that once it's healed, it's water under the bridge.

But it's still hard to read the market from the outside until a move or two are made.

I think the problem is that there's other options for teams in regards to good pitchers that won't cost that much. For instance, Matt Garza is coming back from injury, has pitched really well in his last couple of starts, and won't cost nearly what a healthy Peavy would cost. Why pay the healthy Peavy price when you can grab Garza? Or, why not get Ricky Nolasco, who's both good and not injured and won't cost what Peavy would?

I think we'll see other guys come off the market first. If Peavy gets traded for anything significant, it's going to be because he comes back early and effective or because someone gets really desperate. I don't know if there's enough teams desperate for high end pitching for that to happen.

doublem23
06-26-2013, 01:04 PM
I think the problem is that there's other options for teams in regards to good pitchers that won't cost that much. For instance, Matt Garza is coming back from injury, has pitched really well in his last couple of starts, and won't cost nearly what a healthy Peavy would cost. Why pay the healthy Peavy price when you can grab Garza? Or, why not get Ricky Nolasco, who's both good and not injured and won't cost what Peavy would?

I think we'll see other guys come off the market first. If Peavy gets traded for anything significant, it's going to be because he comes back early and effective or because someone gets really desperate. I don't know if there's enough teams desperate for high end pitching for that to happen.

Well again I don't pretend to have any inside information on any of this, but there's just as many reasons why you'd take Jake over either Garza or Nolasco; Garza's been good since coming back from injury, but uh, he's coming off a pretty serious injury. And Ricky Nolasco sucks.

The ball is in the Sox's court, anyways, if they can't find a suitable price for Jake, then just keep him, his salary's not killing anybody, he's not keeping any blue chip prospect buried in AAA, he's one of the few veterans on this team that is actually playing well, and maybe this time next year, he's still pitching well and more valuable because there's another year less of guaranteed money he's owed. :dunno:

DSpivack
06-26-2013, 01:31 PM
Well again I don't pretend to have any inside information on any of this, but there's just as many reasons why you'd take Jake over either Garza or Nolasco; Garza's been good since coming back from injury, but uh, he's coming off a pretty serious injury. And Ricky Nolasco sucks.

The ball is in the Sox's court, anyways, if they can't find a suitable price for Jake, then just keep him, his salary's not killing anybody, he's not keeping any blue chip prospect buried in AAA, he's one of the few veterans on this team that is actually playing well, and maybe this time next year, he's still pitching well and more valuable because there's another year less of guaranteed money he's owed. :dunno:

With his injury and return likely coming close to the deadline, I wonder if the Sox wouldn't be better off trying to deal him in the offseason. That said, no reason not to dangle him now and see what the offers are.

TheVulture
06-26-2013, 01:31 PM
I read on a Dodger site yesterday that they (i.e. the Dodger fans) generally seemed to think it was a good idea to acquire Ramirez, FWIW. In fact, they seemed to think it was somewhat unrealistic on their part to think the Dodgers could pull this trade off.

TheVulture
06-26-2013, 01:37 PM
Why pay the healthy Peavy price when you can grab Garza? Or, why not get Ricky Nolasco, who's both good and not injured and won't cost what Peavy would?


If that were teams' mentality, why would anyone sign better players to higher contracts? They sign the better players for higher contracts because they want to win. Peavy is a pitcher you want out on the mound in a big game, those other guys are not. Plain and simple.

blandman
06-26-2013, 02:25 PM
Well again I don't pretend to have any inside information on any of this, but there's just as many reasons why you'd take Jake over either Garza or Nolasco; Garza's been good since coming back from injury, but uh, he's coming off a pretty serious injury. And Ricky Nolasco sucks.

The ball is in the Sox's court, anyways, if they can't find a suitable price for Jake, then just keep him, his salary's not killing anybody, he's not keeping any blue chip prospect buried in AAA, he's one of the few veterans on this team that is actually playing well, and maybe this time next year, he's still pitching well and more valuable because there's another year less of guaranteed money he's owed. :dunno:

Ricky Nolasco doesn't suck, he's a pretty decent #3. And yeah, Garza's coming off a serious injury, but he's actually pitching (and looking like Matt Garza).

I don't think we're going to see the kinds of offers for Peavy we'd need to get out of him. Between the options on the market and the timing of his injury, there's a lot of circumstances conspiring against us.

With his injury and return likely coming close to the deadline, I wonder if the Sox wouldn't be better off trying to deal him in the offseason. That said, no reason not to dangle him now and see what the offers are.

Unfortunately, he'll just be a one year rental then, so that also lowers his value.

If that were teams' mentality, why would anyone sign better players to higher contracts? They sign the better players for higher contracts because they want to win. Peavy is a pitcher you want out on the mound in a big game, those other guys are not. Plain and simple.

It's not quite that simple. Peavy's an injury risk who's currently on the DL. He isn't inherently the best option out there. He's got a high ceiling, but so does Garza. Yeah, I'd rather have Peavy. But if the difference between the two is keeping my top few prospects? I'm trading for Garza, hands down.

TheVulture
06-26-2013, 02:49 PM
It's not quite that simple. Peavy's an injury risk who's currently on the DL. He isn't inherently the best option out there. He's got a high ceiling, but so does Garza. Yeah, I'd rather have Peavy. But if the difference between the two is keeping my top few prospects? I'm trading for Garza, hands down.

True, but a big part of it is they are looking to dump Ethier, and they are going to have to take on big salary and give up prospects to get it done(that is if they want a player actually worth the salary). If they traded for Garza, I can't see the Cubs taking on Ethier so they probably have to give up just as many prospects. Besides, the Dodgers have demonstrated they'd rather spend to get the better player. They seem to be interested in making more of a statement to their fans. Being in the NL West, acquiring Peavy would tell their fans they are going all out more than acquiring the others, I would think.

TheVulture
06-26-2013, 02:54 PM
Between the options on the market and the timing of his injury, there's a lot of circumstances conspiring against us.


How many Peavy comparable options are there? Honest question. I'll give you Garza, but not Nolasco.

doublem23
06-26-2013, 03:08 PM
How many Peavy comparable options are there? Honest question. I'll give you Garza, but not Nolasco.

Garza when healthy definitely. Nobody in their right mind would compare Peavy to Nolasco, Nolasco sucks, it's just munch being munch.

blandman
06-26-2013, 03:15 PM
How many Peavy comparable options are there? Honest question. I'll give you Garza, but not Nolasco.

Well, Nolasco isn't comparable to Peavy but he's got positives Peavy doesn't (less contractual obligation, less injury risk, lower trade cost).

Other competing options on the market include Bud Norris and Lucas Harell of the Astros, Scott Feldman and Travis Wood of the flubs (who are both having good years, surprisingly), all good options that won't have a high price.

As more teams drop out, more will be available. The Angels might give up, putting someone like Jason Vargas out there. And depending on how it shakes out the next few weeks in the NL East, you can probably add Cliff Lee to the list.

blandman
06-26-2013, 03:17 PM
Garza when healthy definitely. Nobody in their right mind would compare Peavy to Nolasco, Nolasco sucks, it's just munch being munch.

I'm not saying Nolasco is better than Peavy, only that all things considered a team looking for pitching will grab Nolasco a lot faster than Peavy, unless we intend to just give him away (which we better not).

bestkosher
06-26-2013, 03:59 PM
I'm not saying Nolasco is better than Peavy, only that all things considered a team looking for pitching will grab Nolasco a lot faster than Peavy, unless we intend to just give him away (which we better not).

bland they may go after Nolasco sooner because of his price tag but like many marquee trade candidates they tend to last to the very end of the deadline because they are more valuable and more bidders are bidding.

blandman
06-26-2013, 04:06 PM
bland they may go after Nolasco sooner because of his price tag but like many marquee trade candidates they tend to last to the very end of the deadline because they are more valuable and more bidders are bidding.

There's only a few teams out there that 1.) need pitching badly and 2.) have the assets necessary for a guy like Peavy

While we're on the subject of aces who are injured but might get traded, lets not forget that David Price is also out there

SCCWS
06-26-2013, 04:38 PM
There's only a few teams out there that 1.) need pitching badly and 2.) have the assets necessary for a guy like Peavy

While we're on the subject of aces who are injured but might get traded, lets not forget that David Price is also out there

Boston and New York both need pitching. That alone raises the market as both will overpay somewhat to compete against each other.

Tragg
06-26-2013, 04:59 PM
Other competing options on the market include Bud Norris and Lucas Harell of the Astros, Scott Feldman and Travis Wood of the flubs (who are both having good years, surprisingly), all good options that won't have a high price.



Oh for goodness sakes, Harrell is Axe.
Norris is a decent 4/5 workhorse.

getonbckthr
06-26-2013, 05:09 PM
A team who I think would make a great trading partner with the Sox would be the Pirates. They can use an OFer and a SS and every one can always use pitching.

blandman
06-26-2013, 05:37 PM
Oh for goodness sakes, Harrell is Axe.
Norris is a decent 4/5 workhorse.

I think so too. That doesn't mean someone isn't going to acquire him if they only need a back end starter.

blandman
06-26-2013, 05:42 PM
Boston and New York both need pitching. That alone raises the market as both will overpay somewhat to compete against each other.

I'd like to see that happen, but I don't think the Yanks want to add any salary after this season. The Red Sox are one of the teams we'd be competing to get attention from (along with the Orioles and a few teams in the NL West).

A team who I think would make a great trading partner with the Sox would be the Pirates. They can use an OFer and a SS and every one can always use pitching.

I don't see the Pirates picking up SP salary on an arriving team that has more coming soon. Gerrit Cole just got to the bigs, and they're talking about sending him back down because there's no room for him when everyone's healthy.

Foulke You
06-26-2013, 07:19 PM
I don't see the Pirates picking up SP salary on an arriving team that has more coming soon. Gerrit Cole just got to the bigs, and they're talking about sending him back down because there's no room for him when everyone's healthy.
I agree that the Pirates won't take salary but for me, it has more to do with their track record than anything they have in the farm system. Time and again, they have shown a reluctance to add any significant payroll to their team and I don't see that changing now. Signing Russell Martin for $7 million per year is about as spend crazy as they have ever gotten. However, adding a Jake Peavy to their team would be a statement that they might finally be serious about going for a division title. I just don't see it happening.

blandman
06-26-2013, 08:25 PM
I agree that the Pirates won't take salary but for me, it has more to do with their track record than anything they have in the farm system. Time and again, they have shown a reluctance to add any significant payroll to their team and I don't see that changing now. Signing Russell Martin for $7 million per year is about as spend crazy as they have ever gotten. However, adding a Jake Peavy to their team would be a statement that they might finally be serious about going for a division title. I just don't see it happening.

I don't know, if you're gonna open up a rotation spot, it's gotta be for Cole, right? He's likely to be better than Peavy down the stretch. I get what you're saying about making a splash, I just don't think rotation is where it'll be.

blandman
06-26-2013, 08:25 PM
In relevant news: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/06/marlins-working-to-trade-nolasco-as-soon-as-possible.html

Looks like Marlins are gonna pick up all of Nolasco's salary too.

pythons007
06-26-2013, 11:19 PM
Everyone talking about the Ethier pick up potential. The Dodgers OF is kind of crowded now that Kemp is back and Puig playing so well. They have Crawford that will eventually be back soon as well.

Not to mention that there has been a butting of heads with Ethier and management.

Also, Dee Gordon is looking more of a failed prospect with what he's done in the bigs so far. The Dodgers currently have a need at SS/3B depending on where they want Hanley Ramirez to play.

I don't know diddly poo about their prospects, but anything we can get will be better than what we currently have, as long as we get market value for Peavy and Crain...Ramirez has been rather crappy this season offensively and defensively. This is also a guy that hasn't been paying much attention to the season this year, so my comments might be a bit off.

blandman
06-27-2013, 02:19 PM
The other big starter out there is Yovani Gallardo

RCWHITESOX
06-27-2013, 03:39 PM
How many Peavy comparable options are there? Honest question. I'll give you Garza, but not Nolasco.

You are right on the money. Garza is not anywhere the pitcher Peavy is and Nolasco please give me a break. Peavy is a #1 Garza a 2 or 3 and Nolasco a 5 at best. I for one hope the Sox keep Peavy and see where they are next year and go from there.

RCWHITESOX
06-27-2013, 03:46 PM
I don't know, if you're gonna open up a rotation spot, it's gotta be for Cole, right? He's likely to be better than Peavy down the stretch. I get what you're saying about making a splash, I just don't think rotation is where it'll be.

I know your kidding right? There is no way Cole is a better pitcher down the stretch or any other time than a proven number 1 starter in Peavy. Cole is a rookie with no MLB track record. Cole might be better in the long run; but in the heat of a pennant no way.

kittle42
06-27-2013, 06:29 PM
Cole is a rookie with no MLB track record. Cole might be better in the long run; but in the heat of a pennant no way.

He'll also likely not make it through the season due to an innings limit.

blandman
06-27-2013, 06:58 PM
I know your kidding right? There is no way Cole is a better pitcher down the stretch or any other time than a proven number 1 starter in Peavy. Cole is a rookie with no MLB track record. Cole might be better in the long run; but in the heat of a pennant no way.

Cole has much better stuff than Peavy, is the number one pitching prospect in the game, and is ready. You don't trade for Jake Peavy if you have that waiting with no where to pitch. That would be like the Nationals in Strausburg's rookie year trading for Peavy and sending Strausburg down to the minors. Yeah, it backfired for them. But it would still be a stupid trade. Cole has Nintendo stuff, and is at least going to dominant his first couple of times through.

Tragg
06-27-2013, 08:01 PM
Cole has much better stuff than Peavy, is the number one pitching prospect in the game, and is ready. You don't trade for Jake Peavy if you have that waiting with no where to pitch. That would be like the Nationals in Strausburg's rookie year trading for Peavy and sending Strausburg down to the minors. Yeah, it backfired for them. But it would still be a stupid trade. Cole has Nintendo stuff, and is at least going to dominant his first couple of times through.

Fine but they don't have 5 Coles. (I know - Liriano is suddenly elite now that he isn't with the Sox).
With Peavy, we shouldn't trade him anyway before he rehabs and starts a couple of games. We may have to save him for next year - so be it. There's no reason to give him away - we need to take the risk, get him healthy and then put him on the market. Because if healthy, he is worth a lot. Injured, he's worth nothing but salary relief for JR. I doubt anyone else will pay full price for an injured Peavy.

blandman
06-28-2013, 09:49 AM
Fine but they don't have 5 Coles. (I know - Liriano is suddenly elite now that he isn't with the Sox).
With Peavy, we shouldn't trade him anyway before he rehabs and starts a couple of games. We may have to save him for next year - so be it. There's no reason to give him away - we need to take the risk, get him healthy and then put him on the market. Because if healthy, he is worth a lot. Injured, he's worth nothing but salary relief for JR. I doubt anyone else will pay full price for an injured Peavy.

I think it's important that guys who failed here learned to pitch elsewhere. Don Cooper's a very good pitching coach, but he isn't infallible.

They don't have 5 Coles, but if they can't even keep a spot open for him right now, they're not going to clog up the rotation any more. They could also use an elite bat. Probably more.

Frater Perdurabo
06-28-2013, 10:15 AM
I think it's important that guys who failed here learned to pitch elsewhere. Don Cooper's a very good pitching coach, but he isn't infallible.

They don't have 5 Coles, but if they can't even keep a spot open for him right now, they're not going to clog up the rotation any more. They could also use an elite bat. Probably more.

No one said Don Cooper is "infallible."

However, there is a long history of veteran pitchers and hitters going from the AL to the NL and realizing significant improvement. Facing pitchers instead of designated hitters tends to help pitchers perform better, and getting pinch hit or double-switched out of a game in the later innings while your own team is hitting often forestalls a late-inning meltdown.

blandman
06-28-2013, 10:21 AM
No one said Don Cooper is "infallible."

However, there is a long history of veteran pitchers and hitters going from the AL to the NL and realizing significant improvement. Facing pitchers instead of designated hitters tends to help pitchers perform better, and getting pinch hit or double-switched out of a game in the later innings while your own team is hitting often forestalls a late-inning meltdown.

That's not what Liriano is. The Pirates adjusted a mechanical hitch that caused his control to suffer. He doesn't walk nearly as many batters, and doesn't fall behind all the time. Don't be a Coopologist! :tongue:

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/50493176

Tragg
06-28-2013, 10:23 AM
I think it's important that guys who failed here learned to pitch elsewhere. Don Cooper's a very good pitching coach, but he isn't infallible.

They don't have 5 Coles, but if they can't even keep a spot open for him right now, they're not going to clog up the rotation any more. They could also use an elite bat. Probably more.

I think Cooper is over-hyped in these parts, but I'm more concerned with hitters losing OBP after time with the Sox, then recovering it once they get away (see Quentin, CArlos, e.g.).

Frater Perdurabo
06-28-2013, 11:51 AM
That's not what Liriano is. The Pirates adjusted a mechanical hitch that caused his control to suffer. He doesn't walk nearly as many batters, and doesn't fall behind all the time. Don't be a Coopologist! :tongue:

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/50493176

Cooper obviously didn't correct this issue with Liriano, but it doesn't mean he's not one of the best pitching coaches in the majors, and it doesn't make what I posted untrue.

Foulke You
06-28-2013, 12:15 PM
That's not what Liriano is. The Pirates adjusted a mechanical hitch that caused his control to suffer. He doesn't walk nearly as many batters, and doesn't fall behind all the time. Don't be a Coopologist! :tongue:

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/50493176
If Liriano holds the line on this I would be shocked. The Twins felt they had him "fixed" many times in his career there until they finally gave up. He would go through stretches like this in Minnesota (2006, part of 2008, and all of 2010) where he would pitch well and dominate and then his mechanics would get all wonky again the following year. Consistency has always been the issue with Liriano. This isn't me being an apologist for Coop, it is just who Liriano is as a pitcher.

blandman
06-28-2013, 12:26 PM
Cooper obviously didn't correct this issue with Liriano, but it doesn't mean he's not one of the best pitching coaches in the majors, and it doesn't make what I posted untrue.

Oh I agree, I think Cooper is exceptional.

If Liriano holds the line on this I would be shocked. The Twins felt they had him "fixed" many times in his career there until they finally gave up. He would go through stretches like this in Minnesota (2006, part of 2008, and all of 2010) where he would pitch well and dominate and then his mechanics would get all wonky again the following year. Consistency has always been the issue with Liriano. This isn't me being an apologist for Coop, it is just who Liriano is as a pitcher.

Liriano hasn't looked this good since before he was seriously injured. He hasn't been "fixed" by any stretch since then. He's been effective, but always effectively wild. This is different. He's a new kind of good, one that looks like he's making good on the potential he showed when he entered the league.

sager729
07-06-2013, 07:01 PM
What about Rios and Lindstrom to the Pirates for one of Jameson Taillon/Gregory Polanco/Alen Hanson as the centerpiece with Nick Kingham and Josh Bell as secondary pieces? Maybe a low level fourth prospect like a Vic Black to round out the deal.

Domeshot17
07-06-2013, 08:30 PM
Why don't we just ask the Pirates for Mccutchen and Starling Marte for Axelrod
And Dunn while we are at it. The pirates wouldn't make that trade on your playstation let one in real life.

doublem23
07-06-2013, 09:31 PM
I think Cooper is over-hyped in these parts, but I'm more concerned with hitters losing OBP after time with the Sox, then recovering it once they get away (see Quentin, CArlos, e.g.).

Didn't Carlos Quentin have, by far, the best season of his career with the Sox?

DumpJerry
07-06-2013, 09:39 PM
Didn't Carlos Quentin have, by far, the best season of his career with the Sox?
It would appear so. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/q/quentca01.shtml)

voodoochile
07-06-2013, 10:18 PM
I could see Crain and Peavy drawing that kind of interest if the market proves to be very buyer heavy, but it's hard to get a good gauge of their value without any moves having been made yet.

The best I think we can do for Alexei is swap him for an older prospect that may have worn out his welcome where he is an maybe a reclamation project for the Sox. Maybe someone like a Dee Gordon. You're not getting top talent for a guy whose been steadily regressing for 4 years and still has 2 left on his contract.

If his bat translates to the majors he looks like a prototypical lead off hitter and De Aza just isn't a long term fix, IMO.

voodoochile
07-06-2013, 10:27 PM
True, but a big part of it is they are looking to dump Ethier, and they are going to have to take on big salary and give up prospects to get it done(that is if they want a player actually worth the salary). If they traded for Garza, I can't see the Cubs taking on Ethier so they probably have to give up just as many prospects. Besides, the Dodgers have demonstrated they'd rather spend to get the better player. They seem to be interested in making more of a statement to their fans. Being in the NL West, acquiring Peavy would tell their fans they are going all out more than acquiring the others, I would think.

With that offense in that division they should be making a serious run this year. With Ramirez back they have a legitimate shot at going deep in the playoffs if they can find the pitching. They looked all kinds of scary last night when I went to the game here in SF.

Kershaw, Ryu, Peavy and Greinke is one of the best top 4's in the game. And pitching in the NL Peavy would be even more deadly...

Brian26
07-06-2013, 10:42 PM
The Dodgers acquired Nolasco from the Marlins for basically a bucket of balls, so perhaps they're still in the market for Peavy too. The main piece was Josh Wall, a 2nd round pick from '05 who has a 5.60 ERA in AAA now.

Tragg
07-06-2013, 10:48 PM
Didn't Carlos Quentin have, by far, the best season of his career with the Sox?

Yes, his first full major league season. Then he went downhill and then headed back up with the Padres.

Tragg
07-06-2013, 10:53 PM
The Dodgers acquired Nolasco from the Marlins for basically a bucket of balls, so perhaps they're still in the market for Peavy too. The main piece was Josh Wall, a 2nd round pick from '05 who has a 5.60 ERA in AAA now.

Utter giveaway..except that they are picking up full salary i believe, which was want Miami probably wanted most.

soxfanreggie
07-07-2013, 11:43 PM
Utter giveaway..except that they are picking up full salary i believe, which was want Miami probably wanted most.

That always seems what Loria wants. He either puts together a high-priced team to win a WS or he shoots for a payroll under $50 million that sheds most major talent. Nolasco was 20% of their team salary. After him, I'm not sure if anyone is making over $3 million.

DSpivack
07-07-2013, 11:58 PM
That always seems what Loria wants. He either puts together a high-priced team to win a WS or he shoots for a payroll under $50 million that sheds most major talent. Nolasco was 20% of their team salary. After him, I'm not sure if anyone is making over $3 million.

Besides last year's gimmick opening up the ballpark taxpayers paid for (and way overpaid for), has he ever done this?

cards press box
07-08-2013, 01:00 AM
Utter giveaway..except that they are picking up full salary i believe, which was want Miami probably wanted most.

The Dodgers also received (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/07/dodgers-to-acquire-ricky-nolasco.html) international signing bonus slot number 96 (yeah, that is what it is called) which gives the Dodgers an additional $197,000 to spend on international free agents.

So, the Dodgers' willingness to assume all of Nolasco's salary netted them a mid level starter for the rest of this season and additional latitude to sign international prospects.

soxfanreggie
07-08-2013, 07:18 PM
Besides last year's gimmick opening up the ballpark taxpayers paid for (and way overpaid for), has he ever done this?

You're right. I forgot he wasn't around there in '97 when they won the series and when they raised payroll in '05, their huge payroll jump was only to $60 million. When they won the series in '03, their payroll was only $45 million.

My bad on that one.

getonbckthr
07-08-2013, 11:14 PM
With the marginal at best prospects the Dodgers gave up they still have pieces to make another move at the deadline.