Jump to content

Miguel Montero traded to Cubs


GGajewski18
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/arizona...ade-talk-110214

 

He has 3 years/40 million left on his contract. 31 years old, but has struggled the past 2 seasons since signing that extension. He is a lefty bat but I don't think he's that much of a upgrade than Flowers at this point.

 

What are your guys thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having lived in AZ the past 6 years and watching Miggy play a lot, I don't mind the idea.

 

1) We would not want to give up much. A few mid grade prospects at most plus Flowers of Phegley.

 

2) That contract could become immovable after another bad 1st half. 2 years 27 Million for a 32 year old washed up catcher would be a serious drain on our resources in 2 should be contending seasons. This would be my biggest hangup on this decision. If the DBacks would throw in 10 million, which they never will, then 3/30 makes perfect sense and isnt such a risk.

 

Since the DBacks will need something of value for Montero (new GM doesn't want to pull a KTowers immediately with a fan favorite), and they will never include any $ in the trade (they are cheap and cash strapped), I don't see it happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 10:53 AM)
http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/arizona...ade-talk-110214

 

He has 3 years/40 million left on his contract. 31 years old, but has struggled the past 2 seasons since signing that extension. He is a lefty bat but I don't think he's that much of a upgrade than Flowers at this point.

 

What are your guys thoughts?

 

F*** no

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His "declining veteran numbers" are still leagues better than the Sox production at the position over the previous 2 seasons.

 

Based on fangraphs estimated value and his contract, if AZ sends along half his salary, it is a very worthwhile upgrade over the Sox current AAAA catcher "logjam"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Charlie Haeger's Knuckles @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 04:11 PM)
His "declining veteran numbers" are still leagues better than the Sox production at the position over the previous 2 seasons.

 

Based on fangraphs estimated value and his contract, if AZ sends along half his salary, it is a very worthwhile upgrade over the Sox current AAAA catcher "logjam"

So what valuable piece are the white sox giving up in exchange for both the player and $20 million over 3 years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Charlie Haeger's Knuckles @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 03:11 PM)
His "declining veteran numbers" are still leagues better than the Sox production at the position over the previous 2 seasons.

 

Based on fangraphs estimated value and his contract, if AZ sends along half his salary, it is a very worthwhile upgrade over the Sox current AAAA catcher "logjam"

Flowers is handling the position defensively. Montero would be an incremental upgrade, and we'd still be lousy offensively at catcher. And of course, I 'm sure people want to send a good prospect along for this marginal upgrade.

Why the love of high priced declining veterans? Because they are obtainable? Of course they are obtainable. Danks is one of those - he's obtainable. But would you want your team trading for John Danks?

Edited by GreenSox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 03:35 PM)
Flowers is handling the position defensively. Montero would be an incremental upgrade, and we'd still be lousy offensively at catcher. And of course, I 'm sure people want to send a good prospect along for this marginal upgrade.

Why the love of high priced declining veterans? Because they are obtainable? Of course they are obtainable. Danks is one of those - he's obtainable. But would you want your team trading for John Danks?

Says the guy who wants Alex Rios back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 03:35 PM)
Flowers is handling the position defensively. Montero would be an incremental upgrade, and we'd still be lousy offensively at catcher. And of course, I 'm sure people want to send a top prospect along for this marginal upgrade.

Why the love of high priced declining veterans? Because they are obtainable? Of course they are obtainable. Danks is one of those - he's obtainable. But would you want your team trading for John Danks?

Well said GreenSox. Flowers' overall game made big strides in 2014, is just going on 29 and much cheaper than Montero. Besides, Montero does not have magic glasses!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last time Montero had the BABIP luck Flowers did last season, he was worth 4.6 WAR, and that probably underestimated him by a lot because he's a great framer

 

Steamer has him projected for 3 WAR (again, consider framing) and Flowers for 0.9 (framing to be considered here too but not as much)

 

He'd be an unquestionable upgrade

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 08:48 AM)
The last time Montero had the BABIP luck Flowers did last season, he was worth 4.6 WAR, and that probably underestimated him by a lot because he's a great framer

 

Steamer has him projected for 3 WAR (again, consider framing) and Flowers for 0.9 (framing to be considered here too but not as much)

 

He'd be an unquestionable upgrade

 

Eh, he hasn't exactly had BAD luck the past two years. That's too much money to risk on a two-year bounceback play for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 08:02 PM)
Eh, he hasn't exactly had BAD luck the past two years. That's too much money to risk on a two-year bounceback play for me.

It says more about Flowers than it does Montero. I'm just reminding people that Normal Luck Tyler Flowers is still probably a bad player. Obviously any Montero deal would depend on how much money they send and who we send.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 08:05 PM)
It says more about Flowers than it does Montero. I'm just reminding people that Normal Luck Tyler Flowers is still probably a bad player. Obviously any Montero deal would depend on how much money they send and who we send.

 

I'm with you there. I still think that C is the easiest big upgrade for us to make on the position side, after LF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

We don't know a 100 percent montero can't hit again. We do know the sox catchers can't hit to begin with. One stat I didn't realize is flowers struck out 159 times last year. We need to try to upgrade that spot if possible. Now I could possibly see a danks for montero swap. The dbacks are pretty desperate for pitching. Montero has had 2 down seasons in a row and his 40 million over the next 3 seasons is a sunk cost as in danks 28 million for 2 yrs is with us. If the dbacks are tying to ask for something better then the likes of danks then they are going to eating a ton of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...