Zimmermann & Desmond

[TiredofLosing20]

It appears the Nats are shopping these two with Mariners being one potential suitor. Would you be interested, what would it take, would the Nats even trade with the O's at this point.

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/story/don-t-nationals-want-to-pay-to-play-121414

[25 Nuggets]

It's the Justin Upton ™ one year of control argument. They're simply going to ask too much in return for players as good as they are. That kind of trade would have to come with some sort of pre-arranged agreement on an extension. The NBA solved the problem with the sign-and-trade deal.

[Frobby]

I think you mean Zimmermann, not Zimmerman. One's a pitcher, ones an infielder.

[TiredofLosing20]

I think you mean Zimmermann, not Zimmerman. One's a pitcher, ones an infielder.

I did indeed. My bad.

[weams]

They gave Harper his money after the weekend debacle. Not sure if this points more to Rizzo staying or leaving. Or whether they are reloading or cutting payroll. I can't tell.

[stomperspc]

Judging by the package they asked for from the Mariners, they would want a talented shortstop and starting pitcher with several years of team control, which makes sense because the Nationals want to both contend this year while setting themselves up for the 2016 & beyond (when like the Orioles, they have a lot of players entering free agency). I think it would probably take Gausman & Schoop. In theory, the Nats could sign a shortstop (maybe bring back Asdrubel Cabrera) and play Schoop at 2B. Maybe the Nats would take Schoop, Gonzalez and a second tier pitching prospect (Davies, Wright, Berry) since that would sort of accomplish the same thing. They'd still have a long term middle infielder, a good middle of the rotation pitcher in Gonzo under contract for three seasons, and a decent pitching prospect with 6 years of control.

The Orioles shouldn't do either move, though. All that really does is put all the eggs into the 2015 basket which isn't a smart idea. In either of those trades, the Orioles would be taking on two more players with one year left on their contract which they don't need. If the Orioles moved a starter for Zimmermann (which they would probably have to), they would go into 2016 with only three starters under contract one of which is a big wild card (Ubaldo). Plus there is the issue of where you would play Desmond (would he be happy moving to 2B).

[stomperspc]

They gave Harper his money after the weekend debacle. Not sure if this points more to Rizzo staying or leaving. Or whether they are reloading or cutting payroll. I can't tell.

I think they are just trying to bring in some talented players with lots of team control left in exchange for guys who only have one year left on their contract. They don't want to have to replace a significant portion of their roster next offseason. I think that Mariners trade Rosenthal mentions would be a smart one for the Nats.

[TiredofLosing20]

The one year and done definitely puts a damper on it and I would think that one of Gausman/Bundy would have to be involved. Would consider giving up Bundy as the centerpiece of that trade but only if you could negotiate a contract with Zimmermann. I like Desmond for one year though.

[TheDirtyBird]

It's the Justin Upton ™ one year of control argument. They're simply going to ask too much in return for players as good as they are. That kind of trade would have to come with some sort of pre-arranged agreement on an extension. The NBA solved the problem with the sign-and-trade deal.

I don't know how anyone else feels about it, but I would love if the MLB also picked up the sign-and-trade deals. I imagine it would open the door for a ton of trades

[BohKnowsBmore]

I don't know how anyone else feels about it, but I would love if the MLB also picked up the sign-and-trade deals. I imagine it would open the door for a ton of trades

Sign and trade is really a thing because in the nba there are max contracts. The original team can sign it's pending FA to a higher deal than other suitors.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pollaxt]

The one year and done definitely puts a damper on it and I would think that one of Gausman/Bundy would have to be involved. Would consider giving up Bundy as the centerpiece of that trade but only if you could negotiate a contract with Zimmermann. I like Desmond for one year though.

Zimmermann wants desperately to play closer to his home in Milwaukee. If the Nats aren't going to massively overpay to get him to stay then the O's definitely will not.

[weams]

Zimmermann wants desperately to play closer to his home in Milwaukee. If the Nats aren't going to massively overpay to get him to stay then the O's definitely will not.

The days of negotiating a trade with a window for extension appear to be gone. What I do believe is as a free agent, Zimmermann will take the most money. Like Lester did.

[SteveO]

The days of negotiating a trade with a window for extension appear to be gone. What I do believe is as a free agent, Zimmermann will take the most money. Like Lester did.

The biggest impediment to this occurring is the players themselves. When Zimmermann sees the amount of money that Lester pulled in, there is no real incentive to extend unless the party trading for him is willing to overpay. Most teams are not going to give up significant young talent for the right to overpay.

Sign and trade only works in the NBA because there is a max deal and that max deal is higher for the team that currently has the player than other teams.