LambeauLeap1250 WSSP


  
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next  [ 141 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply

Syndergaard and deGrom

Author Message
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#61

Posted: June 13, 2018, 1:07 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 17476
deGrom is one of the best pitchers in the game. They're not taking our 2nd best prospect plus some random filler. The Mets would tell us to piss off and rightly so.

Cards' fans wear jorts.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#62

Posted: June 13, 2018, 1:23 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 1890
KeithStone53151 said:
bill hAll Star said:
KeithStone53151 said:

I'm much more inclined to target Degrom, in part due to acquisition cost. Let's all keep in mind we are probably paying close to $30 million for 2+ years of Degrom should we target him, though we could always trade him or take the comp pick when the time comes. We'd also be getting age 30-32 seasons. All are simply considerations.

I would try to send Burnes and/or Peralta as the centerpiece in a trade for Degrom if we go that route. I suspect they'd demand Hiura, but that guy is so stinking good I'd try really hard to keep him. Burnes or Peralta, Ray, Supak, and a flier or 2 for Degrom, I feel like that's reasonably close.


Somebody else can probably trump that offer. I know that Ray is turning it around but he still has a ceiling of Brett Gardner maybe with a tad more power. That's a nice piece, but the Mets are gonna want more unless they really covet Burnes.

Of course the Mets keep moving closer and closer to the rental phase for deGrom so if the league keeps lowballing, they may be forced to take something like this. But I think one of these AL teams in tight races may be desperate enough to put 2 top 100 prospects in there.


Right, most teams can beat that offer if seriously inclined. It's not solely about the player though, $30 million for 2+ years is a lot. And age is a consideration. It's still a good value contract but should definitely all be considered. You could always try to include a guy like Phillips or Ortiz instead of the flier. Burnes + Ortiz/Phillips + Ray + Supak. That's probably a bit too much but I doubt any team would offer 4 solid prospects like these for 2+ years of a pitcher at that cost.


I understand that we're kinda inching towards our upper cusp of salary but the salary is zero concern for me. If the Mets were desperate enough to take that lowball trade we've offered and deGrom bombs, the salary barely matters. He's not going to cripple us for 5 years. We're probably screwed regardless if he gets hurt or is somehow terrible.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#63

Posted: June 14, 2018, 8:21 AM Post
Posts: 1977
Location: New Berlin, WI
trwi7 said:
deGrom is one of the best pitchers in the game. They're not taking our 2nd best prospect plus some random filler. The Mets would tell us to piss off and rightly so.


I'm not so sure I'd call Ray or Supak filler. Ray will be a top 10 prospect and Supak could be close, and Supak has a lot of helium right now as he's having a good season. Both of those guys are actually. Teams tend to be more inclined to trade for prospects playing well. Prospects have generally become much more valuable, I'm not so sure it's going to take a team backing up the farm truck and sending over their top 5 prospects to get 2 years of Degrom. Replace one of them with a Medeiros or someone else of that caliber if you like, but the idea is we are sending over a near MLB ready likely mid-rotation arm(which has incredible value), 2 back end of our top 10 prospects, and a flier or 2. If you have to add someone like Phillips to the trade to get it done, fine. It's absolutely possible they prefer guys closer to mlb ready.

For a comparable deal, look at the Greinke trade...and also factor in that even at the time, it was obvious we overpaid for Greinke. Prospects have generally gained value since that trade, so the prospect haul likely won't need to be as significant. We gave up Odorizzi who was in low a at the time and projected to have a ceiling of a mid rotation starter, Cain who posted solid but unspectacular numbers in the minors before trade, Escobar who had a lousy first MLB hitting season but was an elite defender, and Jeffress...who at the time was a major risk and a head case. We also brought back Yuni B. Burnes is better than any single prospect in that trade, so that alone is a trump card. Supak and Ray have a lot of upside and are in AA, so relatively high in the minors. Overall, I view my offer as relatively comparable to the Greinke deal...it might be slightly less in return but again Burnes is a better prospect right now than any of those 4 were at that time.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#64

Posted: June 14, 2018, 8:47 AM Post
Posts: 4039
The Mets are going to demand Hiura to begin. And probably Burns. We have to decide if we’re willing to part with those two plus some.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#65

Posted: June 14, 2018, 11:40 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 17476
KeithStone53151 said:
trwi7 said:
deGrom is one of the best pitchers in the game. They're not taking our 2nd best prospect plus some random filler. The Mets would tell us to piss off and rightly so.


I'm not so sure I'd call Ray or Supak filler. Ray will be a top 10 prospect and Supak could be close, and Supak has a lot of helium right now as he's having a good season. Both of those guys are actually. Teams tend to be more inclined to trade for prospects playing well. Prospects have generally become much more valuable, I'm not so sure it's going to take a team backing up the farm truck and sending over their top 5 prospects to get 2 years of Degrom. Replace one of them with a Medeiros or someone else of that caliber if you like, but the idea is we are sending over a near MLB ready likely mid-rotation arm(which has incredible value), 2 back end of our top 10 prospects, and a flier or 2. If you have to add someone like Phillips to the trade to get it done, fine. It's absolutely possible they prefer guys closer to mlb ready.

For a comparable deal, look at the Greinke trade...and also factor in that even at the time, it was obvious we overpaid for Greinke. Prospects have generally gained value since that trade, so the prospect haul likely won't need to be as significant. We gave up Odorizzi who was in low a at the time and projected to have a ceiling of a mid rotation starter, Cain who posted solid but unspectacular numbers in the minors before trade, Escobar who had a lousy first MLB hitting season but was an elite defender, and Jeffress...who at the time was a major risk and a head case. We also brought back Yuni B. Burnes is better than any single prospect in that trade, so that alone is a trump card. Supak and Ray have a lot of upside and are in AA, so relatively high in the minors. Overall, I view my offer as relatively comparable to the Greinke deal...it might be slightly less in return but again Burnes is a better prospect right now than any of those 4 were at that time.


Greinke wasn't close to as good as deGrom or Syndergaard, had less control and had the ability to choose where he went. There is just absolutely no chance we get either one with Burnes and filler and yes, Ray and Supak are filler.

Cards' fans wear jorts.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#66

Posted: June 14, 2018, 2:44 PM Post
Posts: 1977
Location: New Berlin, WI
trwi7 said:

Greinke wasn't close to as good as deGrom or Syndergaard, had less control and had the ability to choose where he went. There is just absolutely no chance we get either one with Burnes and filler and yes, Ray and Supak are filler.


I'm referring more specifically to Degrom, and Greinke was better. Last I checked Greinke was a year removed from a Cy young. Hard to say Degrom is better than that. We were also trading for his 27-28 age seasons versus 31-32...so age was less of a concern.

Also as I noted, prospect value has changed dramatically since then. Teams aren't as willing to trade their best prospects. If they tried to demand Hiura and Burnes they won't get far. Very few teams in baseball have 2 prospects that can match Hiura/Burnes...and I doubt they'd be willing to match that. We'll find out for sure if/when a trade happens, I just don't think both of them wind up in a trade.

And if you think Ray and Supak are filler, you should probably re-evaluate how you value prospects. Those guys are both either in our top 10 or very close...and again, both are having very solid seasons to date.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#67

Posted: June 15, 2018, 1:16 PM Post
Posts: 4976
Yeah I'm not doing this

https://www.mlb.com/news/jacob-degrom-t ... _281132180


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#68

Posted: June 15, 2018, 1:27 PM Post
Posts: 1977
Location: New Berlin, WI
markedman5 said:


The writer did a good job picking the teams likely to target him with the prospect capital. I ruled out the Braves as I think they are more likely to keep their arms for now and potentially trade one or two down the line for impact bats. I also don't think the Rockies stay in it long enough that trade for Degrom makes sense.

I also think this guy wildly overvalues Degrom. If I'm the Dodgers, no way am I giving up Buehler for anything. He has frontline starter written all over him and is already pitching like one, why trade 6 cheap years of him for 2+ years of Degrom? Makes no sense. Someone also may want to tell this guy that Peralta is a better prospect than Burnes at this point. I feel like this guy has minimal knowledge beyond 2-3 top prospects from each team and is just grabbing names off a dated list.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#69

Posted: June 15, 2018, 1:30 PM Post
Posts: 4039
If they tried to demand Hiura and Burnes they won't get far. Very few teams in baseball have 2 prospects that can match Hiura/Burnes


Oh come on. The guy has a sub 3 career ERA over close to 800 innings and may be the leading NL Cy Young candidate right now. On top of that we’d not only get him for the rest of this year but all of next year and all of the year after that. The Mets should not only expect to get Hiura and Burnes but should also, rightfully, expect to get more. Burnes ceiling is nowhere near that of Degrom and he’s done all of nothing in the major leagues yet. I’d be hesitant to trade Hiura just because we seem to lack very many high ceiling prospects right now, particularly positional prospects, and because he seems like the real deal. But you can’t acquire a talent like Degrom or Syndergaard with a bunch of mid level prospects.

As far as teams that could match what we could offer: The Braves for sure could. Hell Atlanta probably has enough to get them both if they wanted. I think if things really came down to it they’d be our top competition, though they might have to pay a little more being in the same division as the Mets.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#70

Posted: June 15, 2018, 1:42 PM Post
Posts: 12508
Some of these offers have no basis in actual reality and are complete wishful thinking in my opinion.

The Mets would probably ask for Hader coming back for DeGrom or Syndergaard. At a minimum they would rightfully tell us to piss off for any offer that didn't include Hiura + one of Burnes or Peralta as a starting point, as Trwi said. Getting DeGrom without including either of Hader or Hiura just has no chance of happening.

Gleyber Torres for DeGrom is way closer than a lot of these. A low top 100 pitcher as the headline piece for a legit TOR starter with a 2.81 career ERA, 10K/9 and nearly 3 years of control? Come on.


Last edited by adambr2 on June 15, 2018, 1:45 PM, edited 1 time in total.

 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#71

Posted: June 15, 2018, 1:42 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 784
Location: La Crosse
paul253 said:
If they tried to demand Hiura and Burnes they won't get far. Very few teams in baseball have 2 prospects that can match Hiura/Burnes


Oh come on. The guy has a sub 3 career ERA over close to 800 innings and may be the leading NL Cy Young candidate right now. On top of that we’d not only get him for the rest of this year but all of next year and all of the year after that. The Mets should not only expect to get Hiura and Burnes but should also, rightfully, expect to get more. Burnes ceiling is nowhere near that of Degrom and he’s done all of nothing in the major leagues yet. I’d be hesitant to trade Hiura just because we seem to lack very many high ceiling prospects right now, particularly positional prospects, and because he seems like the real deal. But you can’t acquire a talent like Degrom or Syndergaard with a bunch of mid level prospects.


Agreed with everything here. The Mets would (and should) be asking for the moon for deGrom. The Brewers cannot get deGrom without giving up Hiura and Burnes/Peralta. Personally, I'd rather keep our prospects. Hiura is darn near untouchable for me at this point.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#72

Posted: June 15, 2018, 1:47 PM Post
Posts: 341
KeithStone53151 said:
markedman5 said:


The writer did a good job picking the teams likely to target him with the prospect capital. I ruled out the Braves as I think they are more likely to keep their arms for now and potentially trade one or two down the line for impact bats. I also don't think the Rockies stay in it long enough that trade for Degrom makes sense.

I also think this guy wildly overvalues Degrom. If I'm the Dodgers, no way am I giving up Buehler for anything. He has frontline starter written all over him and is already pitching like one, why trade 6 cheap years of him for 2+ years of Degrom? Makes no sense. Someone also may want to tell this guy that Peralta is a better prospect than Burnes at this point. I feel like this guy has minimal knowledge beyond 2-3 top prospects from each team and is just grabbing names off a dated list.


Yeah, there is just no way I'm giving up that entire package for deGrom. I'd have a hard time giving up both Hiura and Burnes, nevertheless both of them PLUS two of Peralta/Ray/Gatewood. Now, if we could get deGrom for Ray, Burnes and one of Ortiz/Gatewood - then sign me up for a deal like that. But I doubt we'd be the Mets highest offer in that scenario.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#73

Posted: June 15, 2018, 1:57 PM Post
Posts: 4039
If I decided I’d be ok moving Hiura, which I’m hesitant to do, I’d make an offer of something like Hiura, Burnes or Peralta (they can pick) then Phipps and Lara. Obviously Hiura and Burnes are the headliners. Phillips is the major league ready piece and Lara is the talented “lottery ticket” as everyone likes to say. I’d consider Ray as opposed to Phillips if they preferred because he just hasn’t shown me much yet but I’d prefer to give up Phillips I think.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#74

Posted: June 15, 2018, 2:00 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 76
I would do it, just because deGrom is a special kind of talent and could really put the Brewers over the top. We don't have any no doubt prospects like the Braves, Yankees, etc. have (and I know of course no prospect is "no doubt" but we have more quantity than high end quality. Even Hiura who SEEMS like a no doubter has his share of doubts - does he stay at 2B? Is his arm healthy? Will is K% go down? DeGrom is about as sure of a thing as there is for a pitcher who is available for a few years.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#75

Posted: June 15, 2018, 2:07 PM Post
Posts: 1977
Location: New Berlin, WI
paul253 said:
If I decided I’d be ok moving Hiura, which I’m hesitant to do, I’d make an offer of something like Hiura, Burnes or Peralta (they can pick) then Phipps and Lara. Obviously Hiura and Burnes are the headliners. Phillips is the major league ready piece and Lara is the talented “lottery ticket” as everyone likes to say. I’d consider Ray as opposed to Phillips if they preferred because he just hasn’t shown me much yet but I’d prefer to give up Phillips I think.


I don't see another team beating this offer. I view this as a slightly better package than what Chicago got for Sale, Burnes is obviously less than Kopech but Phillips and Lara are far and away better than the other pieces in that trade. I think the Brewers can create a package and avoid sending Hiura. That package would definitely then have to include Burnes and Peralta. Additional good pieces of Phillips and Ray or Phillips and Medeiros probably are enough.

And FYI, I don't think Atlanta goes for Degrom simply because I think they'd be more inclined to utilize their young SP than trade them for established pitching. They might trade them for a controllable bat, but not pitching. I think the obvious teams vying for SP at the deadline that can compete with our prospect pool are LAD, NYY, and PHI.

And on a side, it seems like many of you seem to think there is a virtual cliff beyond our top 3 or 4 prospects. It's as if you see Hiura, Burnes, and Peralta as having value and everything beyond that is filler. We have a very very deep farm system, Ray would probably crack the top 5 of a lot of teams prospect lists right now. Peralta would probably be number 1 for close to 10 teams and is probably between 2 and 4 for us. You get the idea.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#76

Posted: June 15, 2018, 2:13 PM Post
Posts: 1977
Location: New Berlin, WI
OnaBadger58 said:
paul253 said:
If they tried to demand Hiura and Burnes they won't get far. Very few teams in baseball have 2 prospects that can match Hiura/Burnes


Oh come on. The guy has a sub 3 career ERA over close to 800 innings and may be the leading NL Cy Young candidate right now. On top of that we’d not only get him for the rest of this year but all of next year and all of the year after that. The Mets should not only expect to get Hiura and Burnes but should also, rightfully, expect to get more. Burnes ceiling is nowhere near that of Degrom and he’s done all of nothing in the major leagues yet. I’d be hesitant to trade Hiura just because we seem to lack very many high ceiling prospects right now, particularly positional prospects, and because he seems like the real deal. But you can’t acquire a talent like Degrom or Syndergaard with a bunch of mid level prospects.


Agreed with everything here. The Mets would (and should) be asking for the moon for deGrom. The Brewers cannot get deGrom without giving up Hiura and Burnes/Peralta. Personally, I'd rather keep our prospects. Hiura is darn near untouchable for me at this point.


That's the thing, no other team is willing to trade their elite prospects. The Nats didn't trade Robles, the Braves didn't trade Acuna. These blue chip guys simply don't get traded anymore. The Phillies might be willing to include Sanchez in a trade, the Dodgers might be willing to include Verdugo...those are probably the best prospects that the Mets might get for Degrom. Hiura ranks above both of those guys at this point in my opinion, maybe he gets included in a trade but I doubt it.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#77

Posted: June 15, 2018, 2:32 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 784
Location: La Crosse
I guess I don't know what you qualify as blue chip, but I would disagree with that. Look at the Quintana, Chapman, Miller (Shelby and Andrew), Eaton, Yelich, Sale, Lucroy, Andrelton Simmons, etc. trades. Blue Chip prospects do get traded especially for elite controlled talent like deGrom.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#78

Posted: June 15, 2018, 2:32 PM Post
Posts: 29
The mlb.com piece suggesting Huira, Burnes, Peralta, and Ray may very well be what it would take to pry deGrom away from the Mets. Those are realistically the Brewers 4 best prospects right now though and it would legitimately decimate their farm system. Probably too much for me to root for them to pull the trigger.

Something interesting to consider: if the Brewers are ok to run up their payroll significantly they'll probably be ok to empty their farm system to some extent because every important player is controlled through at least 2020. I think the goal is to keep this thing going perpetually though and not inadvertently define a window. Giving up that package for deGrom basically defines a window for them at 2020. Probably not something Stearns will pull the trigger on if that's what it would take.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#79

Posted: June 15, 2018, 2:46 PM Post
Posts: 4039
That's the thing, no other team is willing to trade their elite prospects


Atlanta though has a lot more than Acuna. MLB.com has them with 5 additional players, all pitchers no less, in their top 50. It would actually be a very wise move for them to send two of them to NY for either Degrom or Syndergaard because surely some of them will eventually lose some value.

It might also help the Brewers if NYM trades both of their pitchers and Atlanta gives up some pitching prospects for one of them because maybe then the Metropolitans would be more likely to accept positional prospects like Ray and Phillips as secondary pieces as opposed to Burns or Peralta. I wonder if Hiura, Ray, Phillips and maybe a lesser pitcher like Ponce or Dilplan would be enough. Probably depends on how the Mets view Ray.

Let’s look at the overall hypothetical picture for the Mets: They trade Syndergaard and Degrom and acquire, hypothetically: Allard, Soroka, Toussaint, Hiura, Ray, Phillips and Diplan. Enough?


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Syndergaard and deGrom
#80

Posted: June 15, 2018, 2:47 PM Post
Posts: 1977
Location: New Berlin, WI
OnaBadger58 said:
I guess I don't know what you qualify as blue chip, but I would disagree with that. Look at the Quintana, Chapman, Miller (Shelby and Andrew), Eaton, Yelich, Sale, Lucroy, Andrelton Simmons, etc. trades. Blue Chip prospects do get traded especially for elite controlled talent like deGrom.


Yelich and Lucroy brought back Brinson as the "blue-chip" guy, but I wouldn't call him blue chip. He has a high floor on the defensive side but the bat had always been questionable. The Quintana, Chapman, Shelby Miller, and Sale trades were desperation moves...massive overpays done by arguably terrible GM's. Everyone thinks Theo is a genius for some reason, so I'll avoid including him but Dombrowski and Stewart are indisputably dreadful GM's. I'm not sure what blue chip prospect was in the Simmons deal. I think Frazier was a bit overrated at the time of the trade, I don't know that he's as good of a prospect as Hiura was. With the Eaton deal, I believe the Nationals were actively trying to trade Gioloto for some reason...and I'm not sure why. That trade didn't make much sense to anybody at the time.

The teams willing to gut their farm system to make bad trades have already done so...and don't have the prospect capital to compete with us. The teams I listed previously, NYY, LAD, PHI have very solid GM's that aren't going to massively overpay for Degrom.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next  [ 141 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply
  


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search this forum (phpBB search):
Jump to:  
cron
Search entire board (Google search):
Google
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Test