A different kind of Trade Deadline Strategy

[foxfield]

6 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

I'm betting on a similar kind of Trade Deadline Strategy, which is somewhere between standing pat and being completely and utterly underwhelming.  

If possible, I think you have your sights set too high.

[Il BuonO]

52 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

He is only owed 26M for the next 2 years.  He is one of the better players in the game and could fit into a window where we could contend.

They absolutely should be looking into him.

And this is a board with the purpose being discussion, so that’s your answer.

I agree he’s one of the better players, but the Orioles paying $13 mil p/year for a guy to be on a rebuilding team seems unlikely.

[7Mo]

5 minutes ago, Il BuonO said:

I agree he’s one of the better players, but the Orioles paying $13 mil p/year for a guy to be on a rebuilding team seems unlikely.

I'd like to see them spend $13M over the winter spread over 4 guys, 2 starters and 2 position players. But that's probably $10M too optimistic. 

[Sports Guy]

25 minutes ago, Philip said:

For the second time I am not advocating throwing him away for nothing. But also for the second time, he is not worth very much despite your protestations to the contrary, so he’s not going to bring back very much, and I don’t think he will be traded regardless. But I would love for him to depart.

Trading him for “not very much” is the height of stupidity.

[Mitch Connor]

5 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Jose Ramirez is reportedly available.  I would look into a trade for him.

 

What would you propose we give up? I would believe Cleveland would be looking to acquire young cheap talent, as we are looking to do during our rebuild. 

[Frobby]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Trading him for “not very much” is the height of stupidity.

Let’s break it down.  Scott has a 4.11 career ERA, 3.12 this year.   He’s under team control for three more years.  

Givens had a 3.32 ERA as an O, 1.38 last year when traded.   He had 1.3 years of service remaining.   We received Vavra, Nevin and Deson in return.  

Castro had a 4.30 career ERA when traded, 4.01 in 2020 at the time of the trade.  He had 2.3 years of service remaining.   We got Kevin Smith and Victor Gonzalez in exchange.  

Logically, I think Scott should have more trade value than Castro did.   He’s under control longer, his career and season ERAs are better, and he has more upside.  The one advantage Castro had was he logged more innings per year than Scott.  But I’d still say Scott has more value despite his walks and inconsistency.  It’s not like Castro was the model of consistency.  

Scott is probably a less valuable than Givens, who had a lower ERA both career and in 2020 and had been successful in high leverage situations in the past (though he’d struggled as a closer).  The big edge for Scott is he’s under control for 3.3 years compared to 1.3 for Givens.   

So, I’d say one top 10 org prospect and one Dominican lottery ticket is probably the floor for a Scott trade.   We might get  an extra DSL type or an extra top 20ish prospect in lieu of getting a Dominican lottery ticket type.  

Is that “not very much?”   Depends on your point of view I guess.  
 

 

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, Mitch Connor said:

What would you propose we give up? I would believe Cleveland would be looking to acquire young cheap talent, as we are looking to do during our rebuild. 

This is a good question.  I think the best prospect I would be willing to trade is DL Hall.  Great upside but also a huge reliever potential as well.

There are a lot of guys I would put on the table.  Really depends on what Cle is looking for and what areas they want.

[7Mo]

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

So, I’d say one top 10 org prospect and one Dominican lottery ticket is probably the floor for a Scott trade.   We might get  an extra DSL type or an extra top 20ish prospect in lieu of getting a Dominican lottery ticket type.  

Is that “not very much?”   Depends on your point of view I guess.  
 

 

I'd feel good about that.

[Sports Guy]

Btw, Fry seems to be back on track and is in the top 25 in MLB in WPA for relievers.

[maybenxtyr]

If the plan is to start contending soon they should definitely be lolking to aquire ML talent. They can always trade if it becomes a log jam at a position.

[7Mo]

29 minutes ago, maybenxtyr said:

If the plan is to start contending soon they should definitely be lolking to aquire ML talent. They can always trade if it becomes a log jam at a position.

In terms of "start contending", I think anyone at AA or even A+ but ready for promotion fits the timetable.

[Il BuonO]

1 hour ago, 7Mo said:

I'd like to see them spend $13M over the winter spread over 4 guys, 2 starters and 2 position players. But that's probably $10M too optimistic. 

Actually, I think that’s within range even for the current regime. 
 

I’d like a little more return for Scott than what @Frobby is suggesting, though. And yes I know it’s a floor.

[7Mo]

1 minute ago, Il BuonO said:

Actually, I think that’s within range even for the current regime. 
 

I’d like a little more return for Scott than what @Frobby is suggesting, though. And yes I know it’s a floor.

I think $3.5M to $4M lets you sign a starter who brings pretty good value. If we do that with the right 2 guys, we'll could have some assets come next July when hopefully some young guys are demanding starting slots.

[billw76]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

Let’s break it down.  Scott has a 4.11 career ERA, 3.12 this year.   He’s under team control for three more years.  

Givens had a 3.32 ERA as an O, 1.38 last year when traded.   He had 1.3 years of service remaining.   We received Vavra, Nevin and Deson in return.  

Castro had a 4.30 career ERA when traded, 4.01 in 2020 at the time of the trade.  He had 2.3 years of service remaining.   We got Kevin Smith and Victor Gonzalez in exchange.  

Logically, I think Scott should have more trade value than Castro did.   He’s under control longer, his career and season ERAs are better, and he has more upside.  The one advantage Castro had was he logged more innings per year than Scott.  But I’d still say Scott has more value despite his walks and inconsistency.  It’s not like Castro was the model of consistency.  

Scott is probably a less valuable than Givens, who had a lower ERA both career and in 2020 and had been successful in high leverage situations in the past (though he’d struggled as a closer).  The big edge for Scott is he’s under control for 3.3 years compared to 1.3 for Givens.   

So, I’d say one top 10 org prospect and one Dominican lottery ticket is probably the floor for a Scott trade.   We might get  an extra DSL type or an extra top 20ish prospect in lieu of getting a Dominican lottery ticket type.  

Is that “not very much?”   Depends on your point of view I guess.  
 

 

I think I'd be pretty happy if we can get a top 10 guy for Scott, especially if it comes from a deeper farm like Seattle or San Diego.

[Ruzious]

I know it's not the usual way trades are done in baseball, but the kind of trade I'd like to see is us trading a veteran and a prospect rated around 10 in our system for a prospect who would be rated about 5th in our system.  We have plenty of solid prospects.  I want a couple more top prospects or young major leaguers.