Sox & Dodgers Blockbuster Trade?

[blandman]

Originally Posted by doublem23

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]

Originally Posted by blandman

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]

Originally Posted by doublem23

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]

Originally Posted by doublem23

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]

Originally Posted by blandman

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]

Originally Posted by doublem23

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]

Originally Posted by blandman

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.

[DSpivack]

Originally Posted by doublem23

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.

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]

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]

Originally Posted by blandman

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]

Originally Posted by doublem23

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.

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.

Originally Posted by DSpivack

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.

Originally Posted by TheVulture

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]

Originally Posted by blandman

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]

Originally Posted by blandman

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]

Originally Posted by TheVulture

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]

Originally Posted by TheVulture

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.