Is Matt Chapman a potential trade target?

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

You don't know that.  

Yea I do. It’s common sense.  They will easily get more than what you are willing to offer.  Good third baseman making reasonable money aren’t sitting around all the time, especially ones with recent MVP level resumes.

You can likely get him for less than it would have taken 2 years ago but 2-3 years ago, he was worth Adley or Grayson+.

Beane isn’t giving him up for nothing.  Zero chance of that.

[Ruzious]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

Yea I do. It’s common sense.  They will easily get more than what you are willing to offer.  Good third baseman making reasonable money aren’t sitting around all the time, especially ones with recent MVP level resumes.

You can likely get him for less than it would have taken 2 years ago but 2-3 years ago, he was worth Adley or Grayson+.

Beane isn’t giving him up for nothing.  Zero chance of that.

This is sounding like our discussion about Mancini when you also KNEW GM's knew that he's a much better player than he was showing earlier in the season - and they were sure to offer significant value for him.    

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

This is sounding like our discussion about Mancini when you also KNEW GM's knew that he's a much better player than he was showing earlier in the season - and they were sure to offer significant value for him.    

Well he did get better.

And we don’t know what was offered. I never said anything about him being worth significant value.  I did think he could be worth a back end top 100 guy but I’m not sure I call that significant but maybe you do.  I certainly never said he definitely will be worth that.

[Ruzious]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Well he did get better.

And we don’t know what was offered. I never said anything about him being worth significant value.  I did think he could be worth a back end top 100 guy but I’m not sure I call that significant but maybe you do.  I certainly never said he definitely will be worth that.

I top 100 guy is most definitely significant value - far more than the O's will ever get for him.    

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

I top 100 guy is most definitely significant value - far more than the O's will ever get for him.    

Ok

[interloper]

Naw.

[LookinUp]

The typical fan's perspective is simple. Pay the Free Agent (Bryant) before giving up prospects for a similarly valued player. 

One costs prospects. The other costs more money. It's not our money, so we go with the latter. The problem, of course, is Kris Bryant is a FA who is free to choose where he wants to go. He's not coming here unless he's one of many pieces coming here in some Marlins-like splash. That's not happening, so he's not coming here. Period.

With that said, we have a 1-2 year hole at 3B right now. Do we fill it to be more respectable but still a losing team next year or do we wait for Gunnar/Mayo? 

I think Elias waits, and the debate is about the implications of waiting.

[RZNJ]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

He was a 7ish WAR player recently.

Can he get his bat back?  That’s the question.  Getting out of that park could help although he has been good there in the past. 
 

I would certainly gamble on him becoming a better player again.  

Let's make two basic assumptions.  There is no guarantee you can extend him when you make the trade (and you may not even want to extend him).   Let's also assume that what Murph offered up, Henderson, Stowers, and Trimble is the cost.    Do you make that trade for two guaranteed years of Chapman?   I don't think it makes much sense.

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Let's make two basic assumptions.  There is no guarantee you can extend him when you make the trade (and you may not even want to extend him).   Let's also assume that what Murph offered up, Henderson, Stowers, and Trimble is the cost.    Do you make that trade for two guaranteed years of Chapman?   I don't think it makes much sense.

It makes no sense.

There is zero chance the O's contend next season so you are trading all that and paying two years of Arbitration in the hopes that he makes the 2023 team a playoff team.

Hard pass.

[HowAboutThat]

7 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Let's make two basic assumptions.  There is no guarantee you can extend him when you make the trade (and you may not even want to extend him).   Let's also assume that what Murph offered up, Henderson, Stowers, and Trimble is the cost.    Do you make that trade for two guaranteed years of Chapman?   I don't think it makes much sense.

That’s a stupid trade, and I guarantee you Billy Beane would be overjoyed. He’s getting three years per Prospect of minimum wage production. And Beane Knows what we have two, he’s not any more interested in Diaz or Grenier than we are.

Beane is concerned about the money he is about to spend, and I’m sure he would be delighted to get shut of it I would be happy to acquire Chapman, but I think it would be cheaper and easier to get Seager.

The idea of getting Bryant is kind of laughable But the most likely is that unless Mike has flipped the switch, next years third baseman is going to be closer to Franco than to anybody else.

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Let's make two basic assumptions.  There is no guarantee you can extend him when you make the trade (and you may not even want to extend him).   Let's also assume that what Murph offered up, Henderson, Stowers, and Trimble is the cost.    Do you make that trade for two guaranteed years of Chapman?   I don't think it makes much sense.

As someone who thinks they can and will contend in 2023, I think I do make that move.  You make a QO after 2023 (if you don’t extend him) and you essentially get back another Stowers or Trimble type player in that following draft.

And you hope you can convince him to extend in the meantime.

I don’t view Stowers as a major loss, certainly not one to stop me from getting a player like Chapman.  
 

The caveat to all of this is that the team also plans on making additional moves to make the team much better and that their window and idea for the next 2 years lines up with how I’m thinking…IE, a 75ish win team in 2022 And WC contender in 2023.

If they don’t feel the same way and don’t have that same time table and aren’t willing to make that commitment  than I would not deal Henderson for him.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

As someone who thinks they can and will contend in 2023, I think I do make that move.  You make a QO after 2023 (if you don’t extend him) and you essentially get back another Stowers or Trimble type player in that following draft.

And you hope you can convince him to extend in the meantime.

I don’t view Stowers as a major loss, certainly not one to stop me from getting a player like Chapman.  
 

The caveat to all of this is that the team also plans on making additional moves to make the team much better and that their window and idea for the next 2 years lines up with how I’m thinking…IE, a 75ish win team in 2022 And WC contender in 2023.

If they don’t feel the same way and don’t have that same time table and aren’t willing to make that commitment  than I would not deal Henderson for him.

Do you really want to lock yourself into an extension with an over 30 guy whose value is mostly defensive?

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Do you really want to lock yourself into an extension with an over 30 guy whose value is mostly defensive?

Well you are making an assumption that his bat won’t get better.  I don’t think we can assume that, especially coming to OPACY. Im also not talking about some 6+ year extension.  A 4-5 year deal, including his 2 arb years, is palatable for me and worth the risk.  Of course, I think he is a Boras client, so he may not be willing to sign that deal.

I have no issues with any of it with him.  My issue in trading for him is solely about the commitment to the team Elias and ownership is willing to make the next few years.  To me, that is where the discussion is.

Throwing out names like Stowers and Trimble mean nothing to me for a deal like this.  I would trade 3 or 4 Kyle Stowers type prospects and not even blink.  Henderson does.  So I’m only doing it if the commitment is there.  
 

 

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Well you are making an assumption that his bat won’t get better.  I don’t think we can assume that, especially coming to OPACY. Im also not talking about some 6+ year extension.  A 4-5 year deal, including his 2 arb years, is palatable for me and worth the risk.  Of course, I think he is a Boras client, so he may not be willing to sign that deal.

I have no issues with any of it with him.  My issue in trading for him is solely about the commitment to the team Elias and ownership is willing to make the next few years.  To me, that is where the discussion is.

Throwing out names like Stowers and Trimble mean nothing to me for a deal like this.  I would trade 3 or 4 Kyle Stowers type prospects and not even blink.  Henderson does.  So I’m only doing it if the commitment is there.  
 

 

Ballpark isn't relevant.

The bat is the bat, the numbers will vary from park to park but not the bat itself.

And yes I am not expecting his bat to improve as he gets older.  Unless you are Nelson Cruz that is how it generally works.

[RZNJ]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Ballpark isn't relevant.

The bat is the bat, the numbers will vary from park to park but not the bat itself.

And yes I am not expecting his bat to improve as he gets older.  Unless you are Nelson Cruz that is how it generally works.

Not sure if he is playing with an injury this season but his DWAR is significantly down accord to BRef as well.   I'm sure there are other defensive metrics but that's the one I'm looking at.