Would you trade Kjerstad for an elite controlled reliever?

[RarityFlaherty]

26 minutes ago, baltfan said:

I agree with this to a certain degree.  I bet there are people on this board that think the Cubs lost by trading Torres for Chapman and the Rangers lost by trading Ragans for Chapman.  Winning it all outweighs everything else.  

Here is a controversial take.  I would trade Holliday + for Skenes.  Skenes on this team would put it completely over the top.  I know there are injury concerns, but look at what this team really needs.

Depends on what that plus is, but I’d probably do Holliday for Skenes too. We can definitely replace Holliday at 2nd. I think the real question is whether or not the Pirates would actually entertain trading Skenes for anything. Cheap young pitching is probably the most valuable commodity in baseball. They’d probably ask for a lot more than just Holliday. 

[Bemorewins]

2 hours ago, casadeozo said:

KC got Ragans for Aroldis Chapman last June. And that was certainly not the 2016 Chapman the Cubs traded for.

I think if TEX had to do that all over again, they wouldn’t. Everyone recognizes now that was a huge mistake.

That is certainly not the norm though. You usually don’t need to give up a potential ace for a mediocre bp arm.

[Bemorewins]

6 minutes ago, RarityFlaherty said:

Depends on what that plus is, but I’d probably do Holliday for Skenes too. We can definitely replace Holliday at 2nd. I think the real question is whether or not the Pirates would actually entertain trading Skenes for anything. Cheap young pitching is probably the most valuable commodity in baseball. They’d probably ask for a lot more than just Holliday. 

To be honest this is an interesting proposition. But due to the high injury probability of pitchers in today’s game, I would rather have the top notch position player prospect. It is very likely that Holliday will give you higher value over the long term than Skenes.

Until the injury issues are resolved regarding pitchers, pitchers have to be viewed as a short term asset.

I would not trade Holliday straight up for Skenes. Let alone adding “a lot more”. Over 6/7 years you are almost assuredly to get more value/WAR from the Holliday + “a lot more” end of things.

[Dunk35]

13 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

I think if TEX had to do that all over again, they wouldn’t. Everyone recognizes now that was a huge mistake.

That is certainly not the norm though. You usually don’t need to give up a potential ace for a mediocre bp arm.

Ragans has an extremely high risk arm. Already has had 2 TJ surgeries at 26 years old and has never thrown 100 innings in any season. 

[Bemorewins]

4 minutes ago, Dunk35 said:

Ragans has an extremely high risk arm. Already has had 2 TJ surgeries at 26 years old and has never thrown 100 innings in any season. 

In today’s game almost all SP’s get hurt. So it’s just really a matter of time. You gotta take what you can get while you can.

[OriolesMagic83]

1 hour ago, baltfan said:

I agree with this to a certain degree.  I bet there are people on this board that think the Cubs lost by trading Torres for Chapman and the Rangers lost by trading Ragans for Chapman.  Winning it all outweighs everything else.  

Here is a controversial take.  I would trade Holliday + for Skenes.  Skenes on this team would put it completely over the top.  I know there are injury concerns, but look at what this team really needs.

I think Pittsburgh would turn down that offer.  Skenes seems like one of those generational talents.

[RarityFlaherty]

8 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

To be honest this is an interesting proposition. But due to the high injury probability of pitchers in today’s game, I would rather have the top notch position player prospect. It is very likely that Holliday will give you higher value over the long term than Skenes.

Until the injury issues are resolved regarding pitchers, pitchers have to be viewed as a short term asset.

I would not trade Holliday straight up for Skenes. Let alone adding “a lot more”. Over 6/7 years you are almost assuredly to get more value/WAR from the Holliday + “a lot more” end of things.

Yeah I agree with your thought process on position players vs pitchers. But that’s also why the young cheap guys like Skenes are worth so much. Yeah, he may break, but he’s cheap and you don’t have to give him a ton of money like you would for a free agent pitcher. With our current situation, I’d definitely do Holliday for Skenes straight up. It’s very likely Holliday provides more value during their controlled years, but he’s more easily replaced. If we’re lucky and Skenes and Grayson can have a few healthy years together, I think that gives us a better chance at a world series than 6 healthy years of Holliday. 

[Moose Milligan]

1 hour ago, pdiddy said:

You’re not wrong but most people were happy with the Burnes trade. Context always matters .

There are guys to trade but Kjertsad would be at the bottom of my list. He’s developed into exactly what the FO hoped for while overcoming terrible circumstances to start his career, and will fit a need position when current guys on the roster are wisely let go into free agency.

I’d prefer to keep the guy leading MiLB in hitting that mashes and has shown already that he really wants to play baseball.

 

You're right, context does matter.

I get it, we love our prospects but some of them are going to have to be traded.  Trading Ortiz and Hall didn't hurt much because of 1.  the return and 2. they weren't, like, a member of the inner circle of prospects we've grown to fawn over on here. IMO, that group is Holliday, Cowser (although I'm gonna remind everyone here once again that a lot of you were ready to part with him this past offseason) Kjerstad, Basallo and Mayo. 

IMO, Hall had enough time for the shine to wash off him and while he had his defenders here, Ortiz was a guy that would have a hard time finding a full time spot.  Those two guys were on the outside looking in...didn't know if Hall was a starter or a reliever and Ortiz wasn't Jackson Holliday or Jordan Westburg.

People on here like fantasizing about filling out lineups 1-9 of completely home grown talent, first round picks that'll all pan out, that'll all be great players...and it's just not going to work out that way.  It's coming close, but not all of these guys are going to be studs, not all of these guys are going to be as great as we seem to think they'll be.  

So, yeah, I'd be open to trading Kjerstad for an elite, cost controlled bullpen arm because we'd be dealing from a position of strength in order to address a big need.   

[Billy F-Face3]

4 hours ago, Safelykept said:

 

One year of control vs three, not that makes any difference

Sure service time factors in. But it also seems to me you and a few others like you, think the grass is always greener on the other side based on the constant overrating of other team's players, but totally act like our own prospects are worth pennies. The Orioles don't have the best farm system in MLB if all their prospects are all low rank and low value.

I do agree with Moose's comment about the fetishization of some prospects around here, but then there's the other extreme of that with some of these ridiculous trade offers of giving away the farm for a brown paper bag.

You're not giving what's really possible enough of an opportunity or enough thought.

[deward]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

You're right, context does matter.

I get it, we love our prospects but some of them are going to have to be traded.  Trading Ortiz and Hall didn't hurt much because of 1.  the return and 2. they weren't, like, a member of the inner circle of prospects we've grown to fawn over on here. IMO, that group is Holliday, Cowser (although I'm gonna remind everyone here once again that a lot of you were ready to part with him this past offseason) Kjerstad, Basallo and Mayo. 

IMO, Hall had enough time for the shine to wash off him and while he had his defenders here, Ortiz was a guy that would have a hard time finding a full time spot.  Those two guys were on the outside looking in...didn't know if Hall was a starter or a reliever and Ortiz wasn't Jackson Holliday or Jordan Westburg.

People on here like fantasizing about filling out lineups 1-9 of completely home grown talent, first round picks that'll all pan out, that'll all be great players...and it's just not going to work out that way.  It's coming close, but not all of these guys are going to be studs, not all of these guys are going to be as great as we seem to think they'll be.  

So, yeah, I'd be open to trading Kjerstad for an elite, cost controlled bullpen arm because we'd be dealing from a position of strength in order to address a big need.   

I'm not opposed to trading Kjerstad (assuming Santander is then re-signed), but trading him for a reliever of any stripe seems like a waste of resources. There should be more economical ways of building a strong bullpen, and Kjerstad is a big enough talent to be the centerpiece in a trade for a cost-controlled starter. That seems like the more impactful move to me. 

[Billy F-Face3]

18 minutes ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

I think Pittsburgh would turn down that offer.  Skenes seems like one of those generational talents.

Not gonna lie... When I read that suggestion of Holliday for Skenes I became very intrigued. As you said, Skenes is a generational talent and I doubt he will have to spend much time going through the minor leagues at how old and experienced he is at his age from his college career. He's older and more developed than Holliday.

[deward]

2 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

The fetishization of prospects on here is something to behold sometimes. 

Which prospect has the crowd been wrong to be excited about, so far?

[deward]

1 hour ago, baltfan said:

I agree with this to a certain degree.  I bet there are people on this board that think the Cubs lost by trading Torres for Chapman and the Rangers lost by trading Ragans for Chapman.  Winning it all outweighs everything else.  

Here is a controversial take.  I would trade Holliday + for Skenes.  Skenes on this team would put it completely over the top.  I know there are injury concerns, but look at what this team really needs.

Would you be proposing the Holliday/Skenes deal if Holliday was off to a hotter start?

[Billy F-Face3]

1 minute ago, deward said:

Would you be proposing the Holliday/Skenes deal if Holliday was off to a hotter start?

I'm not who you asked, but if Holliday was off to a better start I'd still think the same. I'm under the impression that Holliday will fulfill his potential. It will probably be on a similar trajectory that Colton Cowser took to get to the Big Leagues. He had to go back down and get a reset then come back up to show what he can really do. Grayson Rodriguez too.

So yes, I would still consider Skenes for Holliday if Holliday was tearing the cover off the ball. I believe Skenes is a once in a generation talent as a starting pitcher.

[baltfan]

15 minutes ago, deward said:

Would you be proposing the Holliday/Skenes deal if Holliday was off to a hotter start?

Yes.  It’s a matter of the affect Skenes would have and the fact that we have other guys in the system that can replace Holliday, even though they are not as good.