Jump to content

Giancarlo Stanton traded to Yankees


Jose Abreu
 Share

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 30, 2017 -> 07:31 AM)
Whether you think adding Stanton is a good idea or not, I just can’t agree with the timing. We should not spend big this offseason as it will be a year too early IMO. If you’re going to take on the considerable risk that is Stanton’s contract, you need to make sure you’re timing the addition right to ensure the biggest potential payoff.

 

I know people are skeptical, but I’d rather see us active in the epic 2018/19 free agent class (even if there is competition) than just jump too early on Stanton. We should have the money to be serious players IMO.

I don't see that as being a significant reason not to do it. There are a lot of reasons not to do it, but adding him in '18 shouldn't be a big one, IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 499
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 30, 2017 -> 09:31 AM)
Whether you think adding Stanton is a good idea or not, I just can’t agree with the timing. We should not spend big this offseason as it will be a year too early IMO. If you’re going to take on the considerable risk that is Stanton’s contract, you need to make sure you’re timing the addition right to ensure the biggest potential payoff.

 

I know people are skeptical, but I’d rather see us active in the epic 2018/19 free agent class (even if there is competition) than just jump too early on Stanton. We should have the money to be serious players IMO.

 

Arenado, Machado, Rendon as possible options for third...or going 3-4 years on Donaldson at high AAV (which probably wouldn't be good but could see it happening).

Edited by soxfan2014
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 30, 2017 -> 09:38 AM)
I don't see that as being a significant reason not to do it. There are a lot of reasons not to do it, but adding him in '18 shouldn't be a big one, IMHO.

How far off do you think we are from competing? I’m hopeful that 2019 can be that year, but a lot of things will need to go right before we know. I’m not taking on a nearly $300M obligation before I feel confident that our team is ready to take that next step, especially when that player has a poor track record of health and has an opt-out clause after three years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 30, 2017 -> 11:50 AM)
How far off do you think we are from competing? I'm hopeful that 2019 can be that year, but a lot of things will need to go right before we know. I'm not taking on a nearly $300M obligation before I feel confident that our team is ready to take that next step, especially when that player has a poor track record of health and has an opt-out clause after three years.

 

I would MUCH rather us just give out a $300 million contract to a guy than to trade for one AND give up key guys to do it. I'd also like the guy to have a better injury history than Stanton and not a have a short term opt out as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 30, 2017 -> 11:50 AM)
How far off do you think we are from competing? I’m hopeful that 2019 can be that year, but a lot of things will need to go right before we know. I’m not taking on a nearly $300M obligation before I feel confident that our team is ready to take that next step, especially when that player has a poor track record of health and has an opt-out clause after three years.

 

I don't disagree with you, but I'm kinda at the point where it has seemed like so many untradeable contracts have been traded that I'm not sure I'm that worried that he would destroy our franchise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The opt out means that it makes even less sense for us to do it. Unless you think that Stanton makes us contenders next year, at best he helps us in 2019 and 2020 when 2019 might still be a year too early anyway and then leaves. And if he doesn't opt out that means he's not performing and we're stuck with a horrific contract. I just don't see any scenario where it makes enough sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Oct 30, 2017 -> 10:03 AM)
The opt out means that it makes even less sense for us to do it. Unless you think that Stanton makes us contenders next year, at best he helps us in 2019 and 2020 when 2019 might still be a year too early anyway and then leaves. And if he doesn't opt out that means he's not performing and we're stuck with a horrific contract. I just don't see any scenario where it makes enough sense.

I don't think a scenario where he doesn't opt out means he's not performing. It just may mean he didn't have a 6 war type season. As I mentioned earlier, he'd have more than 200 million remaining for his age 31-37 seasons or something. I'm not sure he's going to do much better than that unless he continues to provide huge surplus value for the next 3 years. Even then, there will be teams that will feel as though paying him for his 30-age seasons will be compensation for previous performance, rather than compensation for future performance.

 

I can understand being weary of the contract, and the opt out does need to be priced into the deal, but if he does opt out, I feel as though it likely means he performed very well as a White Sox in a time when it is really important for them to begin competing. Would it be ideal if the opt-out was after 2021 or 2022? Probably so. But I feel as though this team is ahead of schedule, just as some of the other rebuilding teams have been ahead of schedule (Cubs, Yankees, Astros) in the past. Adding Stanton for '18-19 very well could transition us from a young team with potential to one with the potential to win a WS.

 

Again, it all depends on the package it takes to bring him in. If it costs key pieces, I am perfectly ok with letting someone else move quality prospects for him. If it means a package of 2-3 guys in our 20-30 range, I think the certainty of acquiring such a piece might trump not moving a few of those prospects and entering a bidding war for guys like Machado, Harper, Arenado, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/10/marl...rdon-prado.html

 

The Marlins have identified a “preferred path” to paring the team’s slate of player contracts for the 2018 season down to $90MM, according to a report from Barry Jackson and Clark Spencer of the Miami Herald. Specifically, the club would like to move the contract of star outfielder Giancarlo Stanton along with those of infielders Dee Gordon and Martin Prado.

 

Nothing really new, more of a confirmation to what many have already suspected. Prado is going to be very difficult to move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 30, 2017 -> 11:59 AM)
I would MUCH rather us just give out a $300 million contract to a guy than to trade for one AND give up key guys to do it. I'd also like the guy to have a better injury history than Stanton and not a have a short term opt out as well.

 

Especially because we know that Hahn would be the one negotiating the contract, and I think he is second to none when it comes to contract negotiations and structuring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 31, 2017 -> 07:24 AM)
Especially because we know that Hahn would be the one negotiating the contract, and I think he is second to none when it comes to contract negotiations and structuring.

I agree that is a strength, but the fruits of that labor have been much more pronounced in his contracts for our own pre-arb players, as opposed to a competitive FA market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Oct 31, 2017 -> 08:07 AM)
I'm actually a little nervous here. Stanton seems like just the type of guy the White Sox loved to add from 2000-rebuild. The money, on the other hand, says Stanton is a guy the Sox would never add.

 

Arenado is too perfect a fit for a run of championship seasons.

I just worry they will make a decision to let Blackmon so they can keep Arenado at all costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 31, 2017 -> 10:18 AM)
I just worry they will make a decision to let Blackmon so they can keep Arenado at all costs.

I could see that for sure.

 

Rdy for drool city?

 

Moncada

Delmonico

Arenado

Abreu

Jimenez

Collins

Burger

Anderson

Engel

 

Swap some out, whatever- still looks juicy AF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Oct 31, 2017 -> 05:06 PM)
I could see that for sure.

 

Rdy for drool city?

 

Moncada

Delmonico

Arenado

Abreu

Jimenez

Collins

Burger

Anderson

Engel

 

Swap some out, whatever- still looks juicy AF

 

I'll rather have Machado than Arenado

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Oct 31, 2017 -> 03:07 PM)
In order for us to trade for Stanton would require us to part with several of the top notch prospects we have recently been acquiring

I am not sure anyone knows precisely what his market is. Most of the speculation has been that would not be the case unless the Marlins took on significant cash from Stanton's deal. Operating under the assumption that the Marlins will try and shed as much of that cash as possible, most folks seem to believe the return (in terms of players they receive back) will be fairly minimal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Oct 31, 2017 -> 05:07 PM)
In order for us to trade for Stanton would require us to part with several of the top notch prospects we have recently been acquiring

According to recent rumors that's not at all true. The Marlins are more focused on getting rid of Stanton's salary instead of eating money to boost the prospect return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 31, 2017 -> 10:13 PM)
I am not sure anyone knows precisely what his market is. Most of the speculation has been that would not be the case unless the Marlins took on significant cash from Stanton's deal. Operating under the assumption that the Marlins will try and shed as much of that cash as possible, most folks seem to believe the return (in terms of players they receive back) will be fairly minimal.

K

With all due respect that is a pipedream

Edited by elrockinMT
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...