Marlins Open to Trading from Pitching Surplus

[Jim'sKid26]

The shortstop market in next year's free agency is rather stacked. Trading high on Mateo might be reasonable if you add a top level SS in free agency. 

Can one of the young OF play a respectable CF if Mullins is traded? My sense is yes. I agree with SG that Mullins value has a finite shelf life. Speed never ages well (see the O's experience with Adam Jones as an example).

This team needs to upgrade offensively to be able to consistently compete.

[sportsfan8703]

I'd like to keep our own players and make a run at Verlander on a short term deal.  I could see us trading some/most of our arb players this offseason in Santander, Hays, Mountcastle, and Tate.  We'd have a team full of guys not in the arb process, or in year 1.  The only player making money would be Verlander, and we'd get to keep our prospects.    

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, wildcard said:

Hard for me to believe that Cowser has Mullins speed and range in CF.  

Let us assume he doesn’t.   Let’s assume he’d be slightly below average for a major league CF, but not an embarrassment by any means.  Let’s also assume he’s a guy who consistently can post a .375+ OBP and an .800+ OPS.   In that hypothetical scenario, I’d rather have Cowser as our everyday CF than Mullins.   Now, would I rather have him replace Hays or Santander in a corner spot and have Mullins stay in CF?  Maybe.   But if Mullins brings back significantly more in a trade than Hays or Santander, then you have to consider that option.  

[Sports Guy]

16 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

I'd like to keep our own players and make a run at Verlander on a short term deal.  I could see us trading some/most of our arb players this offseason in Santander, Hays, Mountcastle, and Tate.  We'd have a team full of guys not in the arb process, or in year 1.  The only player making money would be Verlander, and we'd get to keep our prospects.    

Need more than 1 starter.  Also you don’t want to put all your eggs into one basket.

[Sports Guy]

14 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Let us assume he doesn’t.   Let’s assume he’d be slightly below average for a major league CF, but not an embarrassment by any means.  Let’s also assume he’s a guy who consistently can post a .375+ OBP and an .800+ OPS.   In that hypothetical scenario, I’d rather have Cowser as our everyday CF than Mullins.   Now, would I rather have him replace Hays or Santander in a corner spot and have Mullins stay in CF?  Maybe.   But if Mullins brings back significantly more in a trade than Hays or Santander, then you have to consider that option.  

It’s a pretty simple equation.

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

It’s a pretty simple equation.

There have always been posters who feel like if a player’s defense is excellent, nothing else matters.   I’ve never been one of those people.  Defense is very important.  So is offense, and you have to look at the net impact of the two combined.   

[Sports Guy]

5 minutes ago, Frobby said:

There have always been posters who feel like if a player’s defense is excellent, nothing else matters.   I’ve never been one of those people.  Defense is very important.  So is offense, and you have to look at the net impact of the two combined.   

There is a cost with everything.

Sure, you can keep Mullins, have an above average CFer and be happy.

But you need pitching or else you aren’t contending for real. So, how do you get it?  You either trade what you have on the ML roster or you trade from your prospect depth.   Of course, you can also sign it but we haven’t seen any indication that the Os will go toe to toe with other teams for the top end starters.
 

When you trade the prospects, you are giving up 6-7 years of control, 4 of which are insanely cheap.  You are also giving up less of a sure thing, so that matters too.

For me, I think we can do enough to at least give us good enough production in CF that what we get back for Mullins is worth it.

Plus, it’s cheaper and that could matter too.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Sports Guy

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

There is a cost with everything.

Sure, you can keep Mullins, have an above average CFer and be happy.

But you need pitching or else you aren’t contending for real. So, how do you get it?  You either trade what you have on the ML roster or you trade from your prospect depth. 
 

When you trade the prospects, you are giving up 6-7 years of control, 4 of which are insanely cheap.  You are also giving up less of a sure thing, so that matters too.

For me, I think we can do enough to at least give us good enough production in CF that what we get back for Mullins is worth it.

Plus, it’s cheaper and that could matter too.

Depends what we can get in exchange, of course.  I’ve never been one to expend much energy arguing about hypothetical trades.  But, Mullins for pitching could make sense.  

[Sports Guy]

Is this also the point in the thread where someone comes in and says Mullins isn’t worth much in trade yet somehow the Orioles can’t survive without him?

[nvpacchi]

TLDR: Marlins pitchers have sneaky injury risk.  But I'd love to take flyers on either Trevor Rogers or Max Meyer.

I think this would be my tiered preference for Marlins starters

Obvious but untouchables: Alcantara, Perez

Easy Mid Rotation piece: Pablo Lopez

Lottery tickets: Edward Cabrera, Jesus Luzardo

Injury Reclamation Projects: Max Meyer, Trevor Rogers

I'd lay off: Sixto Sanchez

The scary thing is all of these Marlins pitchers have some high injury risk.

Luzardo has had Tommy John and is out with the dreaded forearm strain again.  Cabrera has had problems staying healthy, including an elbow injury this year.  Lopez has had three separate IL stints for his shoulder (including two stays on the 60 day list).  And of course Meyer is out now recovering from TJ.

Assuming Sandy and Perez are untouchable, I'd love to try reclamation projects in Rogers and Meyer.  Meyer's price may be a bit lower now with the TJ.  Rogers feels a perfect buy low, who MAY have been pitching injured this year with his back spasms?  Plus we don't have to give away a primo prospect for either, and can probably deal from the Cowser and lower range of prospects...

Heck does Mountcastle for Trevor Rogers straight up get it done?

[sportsfan8703]

5 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Need more than 1 starter.  Also you don’t want to put all your eggs into one basket.

That’s keeping all of our eggs though. Give me Verlander and the ability to keep our prospects. Then add at the deadline if necessary. 

[Bemorewins]

5 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

I'd like to keep our own players and make a run at Verlander on a short term deal.  I could see us trading some/most of our arb players this offseason in Santander, Hays, Mountcastle, and Tate.  We'd have a team full of guys not in the arb process, or in year 1.  The only player making money would be Verlander, and we'd get to keep our prospects.    

I agree wholeheartedly with the Verlander part of your post. I disagree with the Santander and Tate part. We don’t have players to replace them or a need to replace them as they are useful/good players. If we could find a team to take Hays and Mountcastle I would be all over that. 
 

I was previously an advocate of adding 2 top pitchers (given our extremely low current and project payroll next year). However, now I think the better approach might be 1 top of the rotation pitcher like Verlander and a bat to replace Mountcastle in the middle of the order. I believe Cowser can replace Hays (may not be as good on defense but will probably give us better offense and almost certainly better consistent quality at bats).

[StillanOfan]

I would have severe reservations of trading away high end Milb assets for any pitcher with only two years of control left with any hint of shoulder or forearm issues.  A pitcher could be injured midway through Year 1 and never suit up for the Orioles again.  And we gave away a high end controllable asset with little return.

If we are following the Rays model, we will trade away MLB assets as they get expensive or before reaching free agency for new multiple Milb assets.

However, I do like your idea of maybe taking a flyer on some of the  Miami pitchers with injury question marks, but I may look at a package of one MLB player and a Rule 5 eligible position player for two or three Miami Pitching  prospects.  Another injured Miami Pitcher to follow might be Jake Eder.

[Bemorewins]

My preference would be to keep our good (not great) players like Mullins and to add pitching via free agency.

Trading good players for other good players seems to be a rob Peter to pay Paul approach. I’m not sure I understand how that gets us closer to being World Series contenders or why it’s even necessary given our extremely low pay roll. I don’t believe we can win championships with bottom type payrolls. Like it or not good players, the kind necessary to win seriously and consistently cost money (whether our own or someone else’).

[Sports Guy]

19 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

That’s keeping all of our eggs though. Give me Verlander and the ability to keep our prospects. Then add at the deadline if necessary. 

And what happens if/when Verlander says no?  Or doesn’t even hit the market at all?  And you need more than 1 starter.