Jump to content
KnightsOnMintSt

What would it take to get Nolan Arenado?

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Jose Abreu said:

So who are the organizations getting 5 to 6 WAR from individual, homegrown star players each year for the last decade?

It was just an example of how those numbers are skewed.  Make it 3 to 4 WAR a year then.  The point still remains.

Can you think of any Sox position player draft pick who has been worth a damn outside of Semien and Tatis Jr. in the several years before this most recent rebuild?  The pre-rebuild Kenny and Hahn era?  And neither guy plays for the Sox.  There is no way this can be portrayed as successful.

Edited by Moan4Yoan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

It was just an example of how those numbers are skewed.  Make it 3 to 4 WAR a year then.  The point still remains.

Can you think of any Sox position player draft pick who has been worth a damn outside of Semien and Tatis Jr. in the several years before this most recent rebuild?  The pre-rebuild Kenny and Hahn era?  And neither guy plays for the Sox.  There is no way this can be portrayed as successful.

Tim Anderson (since he was drafted before the rebuild). But my point is that this is all relative. Sale and Anderson alone make the past decade of first round picks a positive for the Sox, from a value standpoint. Most other teams have not gotten such value from their best picks in that same span

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Jose Abreu said:

 Most other teams have not gotten such value from their best picks in that same span

Also consider they've generally been pick 10 or greater excluding Rodon, Madrigal and Vaughn. Teams that have this perception of great drafting have had extended runs of picking top 5, eg Astros and Cubs(this is also a false narrative) . Dodgers being an exception. 

Edited by mqr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

It was just an example of how those numbers are skewed.  Make it 3 to 4 WAR a year then.  The point still remains.

Can you think of any Sox position player draft pick who has been worth a damn outside of Semien and Tatis Jr. in the several years before this most recent rebuild?  The pre-rebuild Kenny and Hahn era?  And neither guy plays for the Sox.  There is no way this can be portrayed as successful.

I'm not sure how you can paint the Sox being 2nd in baseball in drafted/signed talent since 2010 as a negative, but you are certainly searching for a way.

Let me show how much better they've been than you're acting:

2010: Sale (HOF'er), Addison Reed, Jake Petricka, Saladino (Saladino another really late pick that the Sox developed into a big leaguer)

2011: Semien (I was wrong about his draft year being 2008, Star), Kevan Smith (MLB'er)

2012: Bad year - only a couple guys made the MLB for short stints

2013: Tim Anderson, Adam Engel (19th round)

2014: Rodon, Jace Fry (3rd), Aaron Bummer (19th round)

2015: Bad draft - Fulmer stinks but Seby and Mendick were late round picks who have reached the big leagues so there's some positive there

2016: Can't really start looking at this draft yet, but Collins is a big leaguer, Lambert looked promising, Hamilton is a likely big leaguer.

2017 and 18 can't really be judged yet.

The Sox found a lot of big league talent in the draft, and 3 stars. They had a nice decade. 

They did all this despite not even being able to judge their high first round picks because they haven't had enough time to develop.

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

If you didn’t care about money at all, of course you trade Madrigal and move Moncada to 2B.  No brainer move if we were the Yankees or Dodgers.

If we were willing to sustain the rockies payroll it also wouldn't be an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't particularly think arenado is a play or am going to care that much, would have liked the Rendon route. Like the Betts route. 

I just think it's silly for people to convince themselves that adding fantastic, elite player like arenado is actually going to hurt them. I haven't seen a particularly crippling package, though the levine-proposed cardinals package that was apparently false was way more than I would give or expect them to receive especially at this point.

Edit: But also I know if it came out that Arenado was pushing to the rockies to trade him to the white sox like Stanton pushed to go to the yankees people here wouldn't be like "No, this is bad. Just pay for Mookie next year"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bmags said:

If we were willing to sustain the rockies payroll it also wouldn't be an issue.

Or maybe, the Sox have no interest in investing that much money at third base for a guy with an opt out in 2 years who would cost not only money, but prospects? Especially if they forecast Madrigal to be worth more over 7 years than Arenado is over 2. There's a ton of factors that go into a decision like this, and I think this whole "just move Yoan" sentiment is just wrong.

It's amazing how every time a star is available, peoples take is "get him no matter what!" They then go on to cite cheapness or some other angle, completely ignoring the real reason; team and roster building matters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bmags said:

I don't particularly think arenado is a play or am going to care that much, would have liked the Rendon route. Like the Betts route. 

I just think it's silly for people to convince themselves that adding fantastic, elite player like arenado is actually going to hurt them. I haven't seen a particularly crippling package, though the levine-proposed cardinals package that was apparently false was way more than I would give or expect them to receive especially at this point.

I find it funny that you think just adding a star because they're a star is always the right answer.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a vacuum moving a 5 WAR 3B to 2B or the outfield to add another 5+ WAR third baseman is a no-brainer. I really don't want to spend the assets it would require to get him, though, because I think it will still be a lot and we're not deep beyond our top 5ish prospects. I also don't want to move a guy who just had a fantastic year and his first taste of sustained success to another position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rockies would not be interested in Vaughn or Madrigal.  They have plenty of position players already in their system.  What they don't have is pitching.  Any trade with the Sox would likely start with Cease and Steiver.  I don't think it's going to happen but that would be a much more likely trade scenario.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I find it funny that you think just adding a star because they're a star is always the right answer.

I've watched a lot of baseball, and I've noticed the teams late in the season tend to have great players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bmags said:

I've watched a lot of baseball, and I've noticed the teams late in the season tend to have great players.

I’m sure there’s an equivalent NBA stat to WAR that GarPax could add up over the years to prove that they have had good drafts, like this bogus cumulative WAR ranking.

Meanwhile, the Bulls don’t have enough stars to ever win anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bmags said:

I've watched a lot of baseball, and I've noticed the teams late in the season tend to have great players.

That's great; usually teams with better players win more.

Also, usually teams that win more have a process and plan for roster development and they don't simply jump at every star on the market just because they're great players. 

Spending 25% of your payroll to acquire a player who plays the same position as your best player is a mis-allocation of resources; especially considering you may need to give up a piece that was a part of your roster building future to do it. 

It's cool to build all-star teams in video games, but making bad moves or misfit moves tend to harm organizations in the long run one way or another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

I’m sure there’s an equivalent NBA stat to WAR that GarPax could add up over the years to prove that they have had good drafts, like this bogus cumulative WAR ranking.

Meanwhile, the Bulls don’t have enough stars to ever win anything.

Wait, please explain what is bogus about rating drafts over a decade based on WAR produced?

You have yet to even present a reasonable or rational argument in defiance against the study.

You said stars; the Sox got three stars in 7 years (Sale, Semien and Anderson). Sale and Semien were two of the best picks of the entire decade - if not the two best picks. 

The Sox excelled at drafting players; I have no idea why you continue to insinuate that it's fake. There's nothing fake about it.

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Wait, please explain what is bogus about rating drafts over a decade based on WAR produced?

You have yet to even present a reasonable or rational argument in defiance against the study.

You said stars; the Sox got three stars in 7 years (Sale, Semien and Anderson). Sale and Semien were two of the best picks of the entire decade - if not the two best picks. 

The Sox excelled at drafting players; I have no idea why you continue to insinuate that it's fake. There's nothing fake about it.

Does the cumulative WAR still count for the Sox if they traded the player away?  For example, the Sox shouldn’t get much credit for failing to recognize that guys like Semien and Tatis Jr. were keepers.  For the Sox to get credit for their future WAR after they had already left the Sox is a bit disingenuous.

Edited by Moan4Yoan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

That's great; usually teams with better players win more.

Also, usually teams that win more have a process and plan for roster development and they don't simply jump at every star on the market just because they're great players. 

Spending 25% of your payroll to acquire a player who plays the same position as your best player is a mis-allocation of resources; especially considering you may need to give up a piece that was a part of your roster building future to do it. 

It's cool to build all-star teams in video games, but making bad moves or misfit moves tend to harm organizations in the long run one way or another.

Sox are a very wise, long-term thinking team that is committed to making their budget work which is why they trade away their international budget for cash to give to their 33 year old 1st baseman, and we must never question them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

The Rockies would not be interested in Vaughn or Madrigal.  They have plenty of position players already in their system.  What they don't have is pitching.  Any trade with the Sox would likely start with Cease and Steiver.  I don't think it's going to happen but that would be a much more likely trade scenario.   

I buy this but also this is the rockies. If rex grossman were an mlb front office it would be the rockies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

Does the cumulative WAR still count for the Sox if they traded the player away?  For example, the Sox shouldn’t get much credit for failing to recognize that guys like Semien and Tatis Jr. were keepers.  For the Sox to get credit for their future WAR after they had already left the Sox is a bit disingenuous.

What? Of course they deserve credit. The people who run and evaluate drafts arent the ones deciding to trade a minor leaguer for a win now asset.

The people who scouted and identified the asset is what is being assessed when evaluating the successes of draft classes. The sox drafted well even if they traded semien. Tatis is irrelevant and pointless in this discussion. 

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, bmags said:

Sox are a very wise, long-term thinking team that is committed to making their budget work which is why they trade away their international budget for cash to give to their 33 year old 1st baseman, and we must never question them.

It doesnt mean everytime a star is available you should say the sox should get him. That's not exactly quality team building now is it.

If you want to spin the Sox not being in on Arenado negatively, be my guest but it's absurd.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

It doesnt mean everytime a star is available you should say the sox should get him. That's not exactly quality team building now is it.

If you want to spin the Sox not being in on Arenado negatively, be my guest but it's absurd.

If the Sox could acquire Arenado for Madrigal, and some pitching like Dunning/Stiever, I think you would be crazy not to consider it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Moan4Yoan said:

If the Sox could acquire Arenado for Madrigal, and some pitching like Dunning/Stiever, I think you would be crazy not to consider it.

I think youd be crazy to do a trade like that. Agree to disagree.

Arenado has 2 years of guaranteed control left. And hes already paid market value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Jerksticks said:

Betts 2021.  Close thread.  

This. If they're willing to pay the money for Arenado, just wait a year, keep your prospects and grab Mookie. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Wait, please explain what is bogus about rating drafts over a decade based on WAR produced?

You have yet to even present a reasonable or rational argument in defiance against the study.

You said stars; the Sox got three stars in 7 years (Sale, Semien and Anderson). Sale and Semien were two of the best picks of the entire decade - if not the two best picks. 

The Sox excelled at drafting players; I have no idea why you continue to insinuate that it's fake. There's nothing fake about it.

CRMX3VUFTMI6THLT4K5GXPY3TM.jpg&w=1440 

 

Link from earlier this season: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nationals/when-it-comes-to-the-mlb-draft-the-nationals-need-a-turnaround-there-too/2019/06/02/c6fc31ac-8548-11e9-a491-25df61c78dc4_story.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I think youd be crazy to do a trade like that. Agree to disagree.

Arenado has 2 years of guaranteed control left. And hes already paid market value.

For Dunning and Stiever - there's no obvious reason why those 2 aren't replaceable. We gave up comparable value to 1 of those players for Nomar Mazara. I have little urge to trade for Arenado, but if you're getting a player of that caliber for 2 seasons and all you have to give up is those 2, I'm listening.

It's when we start talking about Vaughn, Madrigal, that level where I have a problem with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×