Hot Stove

[Dooley]

I am obviously Mets biased, but I'm shocked to hear Sox fans wouldn't give up Mookie Betts for Syndergaard. I would cry myself to sleep if the Mets ever made that deal.

The only Mets starter I'd feel comfortable dealing is Harvey and that's only because a) he's closest to being a free agent and b) Boras is his agent. I don't think there's any way the Mets can keep him long term and keep a good nucleus of the rest of their young staff as well. And I'd want the talks to start with Harvey for Bogaerts if the Sox were interested. Not Mookie Betts.

I think we were typing at the same time. Completely agree - although I'm not a Mets fan. Just a baseball obsessed fantasy player.

 

[Rico444]

Ever hear the adage "If fans from both teams hate a trade, that's how you know it's fair?"
Well, Betts for Syndergaard is probably about as fair a deal as you're gonna get. Both are the same age, under contract for five more seasons, and both will likely be all-stars as early as next year. Syndergaard is gonna be an ace (if he isn't already), and Betts is gonna be the cornerstone of the Sox lineup. You really can't go wrong with either.

 

[The Viking]

Deepster stop with the overreaction. Betts has crushed it at every minor league level and in his first full year as a 22 year old had 17 jacks and 20 steals. He's also played good defensive CF after being a 2b his whole life. He is a ridiculous athlete and I'm not sure it would be crazy to see him as a 25 hr 30 Sb guy as early as next year when he's still 3 or 4 years from his prime.
Of course in your eyes every team has 2 or 3 Betts.
If you don't want to trade Thor straight up for betts that's fine but chill a bit.
Oh and by the way Bogaerts is also a boras client and will be hitting free agency just about the time Harvey is

 

[8893]

Oh and by the way Bogaerts is also a boras client and will be hitting free agency just about the time Harvey is

Bogaerts hits one year later than Harvey. Harvey has two more seasons and Bogaerts has three. But if the Sox are concerned about their ability to sign him long term, shouldn't that make him a more logical trade for them? For the Mets, three years is just about perfect.

 

[The Viking]

I would trade bogaerts over betts for that reason if the return is right.

 

[Deepster]

Deepster stop with the overreaction. Betts has crushed it at every minor league level and in his first full year as a 22 year old had 17 jacks and 20 steals. He's also played good defensive CF after being a 2b his whole life. He is a ridiculous athlete and I'm not sure it would be crazy to see him as a 25 hr 30 Sb guy as early as next year when he's still 3 or 4 years from his prime.
Of course in your eyes every team has 2 or 3 Betts.
If you don't want to trade Thor straight up for betts that's fine but chill a bit.
Oh and by the way Bogaerts is also a boras client and will be hitting free agency just about the time Harvey is

I'm not overreacting. You are.

Syndergaard made his debut in May. He's 23. He's 6'6", 240 lbs and threw more pitches 95+ than anyone else in the majors this year. Oh, and he won Game 2 of the NLCS and Game 3 of the World Series a couple weeks ago. He's a guy at the top of your rotation that wins you a World Series someday. I wouldn't trade that for a guy that will likely turn out to be Carl Crawford v2.0.

 

[Stainmaster]

I wouldn't trade that for a guy that will likely turn out to be Carl Crawford v2.0.

This is pure, unadulterated BS. You should lose your license for discussing baseball over this statement.

 

[Deadrody]

If David Price isn't the Yankees #1 target, then they need to bow out of free agency altogether.

Look, the guy is 30 years old. Paying for players' decline years is exaclty how the Yankees got into the position they're in now. Paying David Price at age 30 for 7 years and $180 Million is absolutely ludicrous.

Would I like to see Price in pinstripes next year ? Definitely. Would I still want to see him in 2020 clogging the roster the way Sabathia is now ? Hell no.

Besides, Price is more likely to get in the $190 to $195 M range, not $180M. If you want to spend that much, Jason Heyward at age 25 is an infinitely better option for them to break their recent stance against big name free agents. While many of their starters have lingering question marks, they have more starters than starting slots. Price would certainly be better than all of them, but they don't necessarily NEED pitching as much as offense anyhow. Evoldi, Pineda, Tanaka, and Severino is a pretty formidable 1-4 with Nova, Warren, and Sabathia looking to fill the last slot.

 

[The Viking]

Other than the fact they aren't the same player as Betts is showing more power potential.
Regardless Carl Crawford was a hell of a player until he hit 29/30. You'd complain about that?

 

[Alum86]

Mets need a SS. Flores, the crybaby, had zero rbi's in WS. Tejada is jyst as bad.
Ian Desmond.

No Cespedes. Tender Murph, let him take more elsewhere if he is offered.

Please cut Kirk N loose. Please.

 

[Deepster]

Other than the fact they aren't the same player as Betts is showing more power potential.
Regardless Carl Crawford was a hell of a player until he hit 29/30. You'd complain about that?

I wouldn't "complain" about that....but I certainly wouldn't trade an ace-quality, potential Cy Young winner for it right now.

 

[mauconnfan]

Desmond the error machine? When you have pitching like the Mets you need to be strong up the middle for support. A SS who can hit a little but makes a ton of errors doesn't fit into the scheme all that well form what I see. And D'rnaud can't throw Deepster out stealing so find him another position too. Like his bat but he's just not that good defensively.

 

[Dove]

The Yankees acquired an intriguing player from the Twins in OF Aaron Hicks. A guy probably projected to be their leadoff hitter in 2016 was acquired for Yankee catcher John Ryan Murphy:

ESPN Write-Up

Aaron Hicks Stats

 

[1999.2004.2011]

There is a 0% chance that Boston trades Bogaerts or Betts for anyone, unless they were getting either Trout, Harper, Bryant or Correa in return. I know that Boston needs a front line starter (or two), but elite caliber position players>>>elite caliber pitchers. Bogaerts and Betts are both in their early 20's with multiple years of team control at the league minimum, yet are already posting all star quality WAR at premium positions. If Boston signs a pitcher like Price or Cueto, the pipedream of Harvey for Betts will completely dry up.

 

[mauconnfan]

There is a 0% chance that Boston trades Bogaerts or Betts for anyone, unless they were getting either Trout, Harper, Bryant or Correa in return. I know that Boston needs a front line starter (or two), but elite caliber position players>>>elite caliber pitchers. Bogaerts and Betts are both in their early 20's with multiple years of team control at the league minimum, yet are already posting all star quality WAR at premium positions. If Boston signs a pitcher like Price or Cueto, the pipedream of Harvey for Betts will completely dry up.

Pipedream? That's not even a dream unless he blows his elbow out again then maybe a straight up for Betts.

 

[zyron]

but elite caliber position players>>>elite caliber pitchers..

Yeah, Okay

 

[8893]

There is a 0% chance that Boston trades Bogaerts or Betts for anyone, unless they were getting either Trout, Harper, Bryant or Correa in return. I know that Boston needs a front line starter (or two), but elite caliber position players>>>elite caliber pitchers. Bogaerts and Betts are both in their early 20's with multiple years of team control at the league minimum, yet are already posting all star quality WAR at premium positions. If Boston signs a pitcher like Price or Cueto, the pipedream of Harvey for Betts will completely dry up.

I can't decide which sentence is most delusional. Were you wearing your pink hat when you wrote that?

Thanks for the laugh.

 

[60'sfan]

There is a 0% chance that Boston trades Bogaerts or Betts for anyone, unless they were getting either Trout, Harper, Bryant or Correa in return. I know that Boston needs a front line starter (or two), but elite caliber position players>>>elite caliber pitchers. Bogaerts and Betts are both in their early 20's with multiple years of team control at the league minimum, yet are already posting all star quality WAR at premium positions. If Boston signs a pitcher like Price or Cueto, the pipedream of Harvey for Betts will completely dry up.

Totally agree. Why trade an elite position player for a pitcher who could easily blow out an elbow especially a young pitcher? The Sox have the money to sign a free agent or two without destroying their lineup.

 

[8893]

I do agree that a major Sox-Mets trade is extremely unlikely since the Sox gave up so much for Kimbrel. They'll break the bank for Price, and they'll have to.

 

[Deepster]

There is a 0% chance that Boston trades Bogaerts or Betts for anyone, unless they were getting either Trout, Harper, Bryant or Correa in return. I know that Boston needs a front line starter (or two), but elite caliber position players>>>elite caliber pitchers. Bogaerts and Betts are both in their early 20's with multiple years of team control at the league minimum, yet are already posting all star quality WAR at premium positions. If Boston signs a pitcher like Price or Cueto, the pipedream of Harvey for Betts will completely dry up.

Mookie Betts for Mike Trout, huh? Wow. That's easily one of the most delusional things I've ever read on this board.

 

[1999.2004.2011]

I can't decide which sentence is most delusional. Were you wearing your pink hat when you wrote that?

Thanks for the laugh.

Pink hat? That's probably the worst insult you could give a diehard red sox fan...

As for delusional, I was never suggesting that any GM would ever make those moves, but that is the only instance where Boston would part with Mookie Betts or Xander Bogaerts. Both guys are in their early twenties, aren't arbitration eligible for a couple of years (low AAV's) and were all-star caliber players according to WAR last season (Bogaerts 4.3 WAR & Betts 4.8 WAR) where a 4-5 win above replacement player is considered an all-star level. People can talk up the Mets starting pitchers all they want, but at the end of the day, position players have way more value than any sort of starting pitcher. Good pitchers can be found anywhere, but a starter who pitches every five days with the risk of injury that ends with TJS is not worth an all-star caliber position player who will give you 140-150 games worth of production.

 

[8893]

but at the end of the day, position players have way more value than any sort of starting pitcher. Good pitchers can be found anywhere, but a starter who pitches every five days with the risk of injury that ends with TJS is not worth an all-star caliber position player who will give you 140-150 games worth of production.

Yeah, I just don't agree with this at all, and I think most people who know the game well don't, either.

Even just considering Harvey, he's already had TJS and in his first season back--which had some bumps in the road--his WAR was 4.3. His WAR the season prior to his TJS was 5.2. If you saw how he finished the season you would see that he was getting stronger, and the reasonable expectation is that he's going to be a beast next season and for the foreseeable future. If the Sox are in "win now" mode, as seems to be the indication by how much they were willing to give up for Kimbrel, I don't think they could do better than Harvey. But as I noted, they don't have a lot left to trade, so they will have to break the bank for Price. If they end up with someone like Cueto instead and you think he's equivalent to Harvey, well good luck with that.

 

[1999.2004.2011]

Yeah, I just don't agree with this at all, and I think most people who know the game well don't, either.

Even just considering Harvey, he's already had TJS and in his first season back--which had some bumps in the road--his WAR was 4.3. His WAR the season prior to his TJS was 5.2. If you saw how he finished the season you would see that he was getting stronger, and the reasonable expectation is that he's going to be a beast next season and for the foreseeable future. If the Sox are in "win now" mode, as seems to be the indication by how much they were willing to give up for Kimbrel, I don't think they could do better than Harvey. But as I noted, they don't have a lot left to trade, so they will have to break the bank for Price. If they end up with someone like Cueto instead and you think he's equivalent to Harvey, well good luck with that.

It's not necessarily about equivalents, but it's the inherent cost of acquiring said players. Since cash isn't necessarily a restriction for the red sox, I could easily make the argument that signing Cueto to approx. $15M AAV and keeping Bogaerts/Betts is a much better deal than trading away either Bogaerts/Betts for Harvey (who is arbitration eligible this season and will probably command a $25M AAV contract for six years when he becomes a free agent).

The whole argument that the Red Sox gave away too many prospects for Kimbrel is laughable. Margot was the only prospect of any note that was going in the deal, but most scouts agree that his ceiling is pretty limited as a major league player. Even after "depleting" their farm system in the Kimbrel trade, Boston still has one of the top 3 minor league rosters in baseball with Moncada, Devers, Benintendi, Travis and Marrero.

 

[Dooley]

The Kimbrel trade tells me two things:

1. the Sox are going to do whatever it takes to make sure that they land Price or Greinke or Cueto. You can't have a premium closer with that starting rotation in front of him. They are all in this offseason...which is why Dave Dombrowski was hired in the first place;

2. they didn't deal Rafael Devers - he would be a package headliner that no other club in baseball could match, except for the Dodgers if they float Corey Seager...but it's doubtful they would do that. So if the Sox decide that they do want to trade for a SP (ex - if they can't get one of the 3 above), then Devers would be able to acquire a front line starter.

 

[8893]

It's not necessarily about equivalents, but it's the inherent cost of acquiring said players. Since cash isn't necessarily a restriction for the red sox, I could easily make the argument that signing Cueto to approx. $15M AAV and keeping Bogaerts/Betts is a much better deal than trading away either Bogaerts/Betts for Harvey (who is arbitration eligible this season and will probably command a $25M AAV contract for six years when he becomes a free agent).

Harvey is under team control for two more seasons. He's likely to make around $4.2M this season through arbitration. Again, if the Sox are in "win now" mode, I don't see how Harvey's projected FA salary is an issue, especially when Bogaerts has the same agent and only one more year of team control before they will be in pretty much the exact same position with him.

And again, it's moot now though, because the Sox don't have enough left to deal for Harvey.

The whole argument that the Red Sox gave away too many prospects for Kimbrel is laughable. Margot was the only prospect of any note that was going in the deal, but most scouts agree that his ceiling is pretty limited as a major league player. Even after "depleting" their farm system in the Kimbrel trade, Boston still has one of the top 3 minor league rosters in baseball with Moncada, Devers, Benintendi, Travis and Marrero.

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/66416/where-will-david-price-end-up-signing

New Red Sox POBO (that's president of baseball operations) Dave Dombrowski made his intentions clear when he traded four prospects, including highly regarded outfielder Manuel Margot, to acquire closer Craig Kimbrel from the Padres: The mandate is to win now, no matter the cost, as everyone thought the Red Sox paid a steep price in talent for Kimbrel. Dombrowski then said he'd sign an ace pitcher rather than further gut the Red Sox system. That has all arrows pointing to Price coming to Boston.