Pineda only has a year left and was bad last year. He's not part of their current or future plans beside innings eater and hoping he finally harnesses his stuff.

 

this is counter-intuitive to why the yankees would trade for a pitcher... they already have 2017 rotation depth issues, so why would they subtract a good sp to add a better one? if they're trading a part of their future you can surely assume that it's in part to be competitive sooner, and as such you'd almost have to assume they'd balk at including any piece that subtracts from their major league roster.

 

you can draw a line that this is likely why the red sox wouldn't include benitendi, the nationals turner, the astros bregman, the braves swanson, etc. once these guys touch the majors they become a part of the competitiveness of the team, and young guys that get their tend to instantly become "franchise building blocks" and become somewhat untouchable as you have to replace their production and then some

Edited December 19, 20169 yr by Fantl916

This is exactly what we needed, a second team to serve as a perceived threat to the Astros. I still don't buy the Yankees giving up what it would take to get Quintana, but perhaps they feel like they have enough positional prospect depth to move a couple guys for a legit TOR starter and then use their financial means to plug any remaining holes in their everyday lineup. Regardless, anything that puts pressure on the Astros is a good thing.

 

You don't spend the money they spent on Chapman if you aren't planning to contend. The Yankees' rotation is a mess. Whether they have the pieces to make a deal work depends on how they feel about Gregorious/Castro as their middle infield. If they think one of those guys is fine, then one of Torres/Mateo is expendable. Have to think they'd be open to moving Rutherford since he's a couple years away. So one of Torres/Mateo + Rutherford + is a workable framework. And all else being equal, that framework works way better than Martes + Tucker + for me.

You don't spend the money they spent on Chapman if you aren't planning to contend. The Yankees' rotation is a mess. Whether they have the pieces to make a deal work depends on how they feel about Gregorious/Castro as their middle infield. If they think one of those guys is fine, then one of Torres/Mateo is expendable. Have to think they'd be open to moving Rutherford since he's a couple years away. So one of Torres/Mateo + Rutherford + is a workable framework. And all else being equal, that framework works way better than Martes + Tucker + for me.

 

Torres , Rutherford ++ works for me

Guys, there's no way we'd be getting Pineda, Severino or any other player (ie Judge) who's on the Yankees 2017 major league roster. If 125+ pages of this topic has taught us anything, it's that no team is going to include anyone on their actual roster + super sweet prospects for a sweet addition to their roster. The only exception we maybe have to that so far is Reynaldo Lopez, who was prob a bullpen piece for Washington.

 

I think you'd have to look at some combo of guys 1-2 years away like Torres, Frazier, Rutherford, etc. with depth pieces like Andujar, Kaiperan, etc.

 

And that's fine. It just means that they need to pay up in terms of their top 10. The discussions at this stage are more about options for building a deal, and not the actual details of the deal. It is all speculation at this point. There is no right or wrong answer here.

You don't spend the money they spent on Chapman if you aren't planning to contend. The Yankees' rotation is a mess. Whether they have the pieces to make a deal work depends on how they feel about Gregorious/Castro as their middle infield. If they think one of those guys is fine, then one of Torres/Mateo is expendable. Have to think they'd be open to moving Rutherford since he's a couple years away. So one of Torres/Mateo + Rutherford + is a workable framework. And all else being equal, that framework works way better than Martes + Tucker + for me.

 

Dude, Torres is a few years away too. He just hit .250 in high single A ball for the Yanks. He's not close to ML ready. Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Of course he's expendable if they're planning to compete sooner rather than later.

this is counter-intuitive to why the yankees would trade for a pitcher... they already have 2017 rotation depth issues, so why would they subtract a good sp to add a better one? if they're trading a part of their future you can surely assume that it's in part to be competitive sooner, and as such you'd almost have to assume they'd balk at including any piece that subtracts from their major league roster.

 

I think the main flaw in this thinking is you think Pineda is good. But regardless, the only reference anyone made about Pineda was from me, and it was about taking on a reclamation project like him largely outside a Quintana framework.. I think you over estimate the market for below average starting pitchers with 1 year left on their deal. His last two years starting Pineda has an average ERA of 4.59. However, his FIP is lower and there is a chance he'd be a good 1-for-1 dump if you think you know something others don't.

 

If you want to apply that stuff to Severino, Judge, Sanchez, etc, I get it, but Pineda isn't that.

Would love to get Torres. Kid lit it up in the AFL and there are Cubs fans who still hate they gave him up (including an ex scout I talked to) would be pretty cool to have him and former Indians farmhand Frazier in our system.

I think the main flaw in this thinking is you think Pineda is good. But regardless, the only reference anyone made about Pineda was from me, and it was about taking on a reclamation project like him largely outside a Quintana framework.. I think you over estimate the market for below average starting pitchers with 1 year left on their deal. His last two years starting Pineda has an average ERA of 4.59. However, his FIP is lower and there is a chance he'd be a good 1-for-1 dump if you think you know something others don't.

 

If you want to apply that stuff to Severino, Judge, Sanchez, etc, I get it, but Pineda isn't that.

 

sure, that makes sense. just seemed interesting that his name even came up. i'd assume most would rather have a solid prospect w years of control over pineda w 1 yr hoping a) coop fixes him and b) you then sign him to a longer deal at a reasonable price

sure, that makes sense. just seemed interesting that his name even came up. i'd assume most would rather have a solid prospect w years of control over pineda w 1 yr hoping a) coop fixes him and b) you then sign him to a longer deal at a reasonable price

 

I don't think anyone is saying they would take him over prospects. But as a 4th or 5th piece with the first 3 or 4 pieces being top prospects, I believe is what he is getting at.

Edited December 19, 20169 yr by soxfan2014

sure, that makes sense. just seemed interesting that his name even came up. i'd assume most would rather have a solid prospect w years of control over pineda w 1 yr hoping a) coop fixes him and b) you then sign him to a longer deal at a reasonable price

 

I would start my request with Frazier + Torres ++ and go from there

I'll take Mateo (mmmm... grade 80 speed...), Rutherford, Andujar & Sands please and thank you. Get 'er done Rick!

Mateo stock is going down. Deal would have to include Torres and Frazier, which seems unlikely

I'll take Mateo (mmmm... grade 80 speed...), Rutherford, Andujar & Sands please and thank you. Get 'er done Rick!

 

Isn't it interesting. Do we get more bang asking for Mateo, who had a down year last year, or should we continue asking for these helium guys like Torres.

 

Mateo is scary, since he has now had a down year with no Torres-like redeeming second half, and has a lot of risk because unlike Torres he's not as good drawing walks. He reminds me a lot of a faster Tim Anderson with the potential for more power but just potential now.

 

Just judging by what Hostetler has valued elswhere, I can see us pushing for Torres in any package.

Mateo stock is going down. Deal would have to include Torres and Frazier, which seems unlikely

 

I dont' think it has to include Frazier. I could definitely make a package without him.

I dont' think it has to include Frazier. I could definitely make a package without him.

 

I actually prefer Rutherford (right there with you raBBit). I would love to see Indians fans freak out if we got Frazier and he pans out though.

Mateo stock is going down. Deal would have to include Torres and Frazier, which seems unlikely

 

Torres + Frazier as a centerpiece would be a must. The deal would have to include at least one more (possibly 2) quality prospects as well

 

I like Jordan Montgomery as a projectable left hander with good control

I dont' think it has to include Frazier. I could definitely make a package without him.

 

I think it's Torres / Frazier + or a deal isn't happening

 

I'm not huge on Mateo or Judge

If the Yankees said they'd part with Frazier or Torres for Q, which one would you prefer? And why?

If the Yankees said they'd part with Frazier or Torres for Q, which one would you prefer? And why?

frzaier we need a outfileder unless we covert tim or yoan into the outfield i think we should ask for fraizer and not torres

I think it's Torres / Frazier + or a deal isn't happening

 

I'm not huge on Mateo or Judge

 

I think that's a strange line in the sand. As others have said, Torres, Rutherford and Andjjuhar (sorry for spelling) would net you 3 likely top 100 prospects. All are risky because of age, but I have a hard time saying that is much worse than Martes, Tucker, Musgrove except Martes may be best in deal.

If the Yankees said they'd part with Frazier or Torres for Q, which one would you prefer? And why?

 

Torres. No question. Much better prospect. Kid is gonna be a top 5 prospect in all of baseball soon.

Edited December 19, 20169 yr by SoxAce

I really would want Torres back. Look at this scouting report and tell me you wouldn't bet on these skills over other players we are discussing:

At just 19 years old he already has excellent pitch recognition skills and has shown the ability to sort through breaking pitches in order to get to the fastball he desires. Early in the season, Torres tried too hard to hit for power and got pull happy, but he showed the ability to adjust and got back to an all-fields approach. Evaluators believe Torres has the ability to hit for plus average and plus power, and this season showed pop to both corners. It’s evident in both games and batting practice, but Torres has an uncanny ability to put barrel of the bat on the baseball. To prove it, he opened his AFL campaign with a monster home run to the opposite field at Scottsdale Stadium.

Read more at http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/2017...TCWTQ1jJb6jh.99

I think I would prefer Torres as well. He's younger and more raw, but I think his ceiling is higher. It'd be awesome if a former Cubs prospect became a star on the South Side.

Torres, Rutherford/Frazier (only one) and a couple depth pieces would be a dream. The Yankees depth pieces are near unmatched around baseball. You need a good headliner for Quintana but if the Yankees are willing to include that (and if the rumors reached this point they probably are) they can fill out a 4 player deal as well as anyone.

 

At the very least the Astros have to put their foot on the gas.

 

HOT STOVE STATUS: HEATIN' UP

If the Yankees said they'd part with Frazier or Torres for Q, which one would you prefer? And why?

 

Torres. Think he's got a higher ceiling, more refined hit tool.

 

And paired with Rutherford would make me ecstatic.