ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 19, 2015 20:28:47 GMT -5
So let's see, Goldschmidt (conservatively) projects at something like 23 WAR over the next 5 years (with the option). At (again, conservatively), $7 million/WAR, that's $161 million of value there. And he's getting paid... $43 million, if the option gets picked up? That's insane. That's Mookie + Swihart + Owens territory. Never going to happen, but fun to think about. Well, it's also Swihart + Moncada + Bradley re-established as an average hitting CF (and hence a 4.0 WAR player) territory, and those could all be surplus pieces by this winter. Fun indeed.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jun 10, 2015 21:06:07 GMT -5
I was thinking buchholz, Napoli, Owens and Margot for goldschmidt. Plus we pay the rest of napoli's salary for 2015.
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Jun 10, 2015 22:16:56 GMT -5
I was thinking buchholz, Napoli, Owens and Margot for goldschmidt. Plus we pay the rest of napoli's salary for 2015.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jun 10, 2015 23:15:04 GMT -5
I was thinking buchholz, Napoli, Owens and Margot for goldschmidt. Plus we pay the rest of napoli's salary for 2015. Well of course... Dave Stewart ought to jump on that deal. No telling when the Sox might rethink their offer and come to their senses.... Ay-ay-ay.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jun 11, 2015 8:41:41 GMT -5
I was thinking buchholz, Napoli, Owens and Margot for goldschmidt. Plus we pay the rest of napoli's salary for 2015. While I am one of the very few here who likes out of the box trade proposals, you're never going to be able to trade for someone like Goldschmidt with spare parts. Think about how much Arizona would hurt if they lost Goldschmidt, and if the package you are proposing doesn't hurt Boston as much, it doesn't make sense.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,857
|
Post by nomar on Jun 11, 2015 15:06:10 GMT -5
Arizona probably wouldn't even do Moncada + Devers + Owens for Goldschmidt if we offered.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Jun 11, 2015 19:25:16 GMT -5
Isn't there a preclusion on trading first year players?
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,857
|
Post by nomar on Jun 12, 2015 17:01:18 GMT -5
Isn't there a preclusion on trading first year players? Not the point at all, but I'm not sure if Moncada is eligible to be traded. I know they changed the rule about trading draftees to the end of the season in which they were signed rather than a full calendar year.
|
|
|
Post by geezergeek on Jun 15, 2015 20:17:27 GMT -5
Isn't there a preclusion on trading first year players? I think only players acquired through the draft.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 12, 2017 5:27:40 GMT -5
Just a prediction, but if Ortiz doesn't come back, this is the guy the Sox go get at the trade deadline imo. The need looking in 2017 would be the big bat in the middle of the order and better production potentially at first base this year.
Paul is cheap and controllable making a AAV of 8.8 million until 2019 with a option of 14.5 million in 2019.
The Diamondbacks probably won't be great in 2017, and they have already checked in with Boston catchers Blake Swihart and Christian Vasquez.
My guess is that we see a trade of Mitch Moreland, Blake Swihart, Sam Travis, and a lower level prospect for Paul Goldshmidt.
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Jan 12, 2017 6:04:56 GMT -5
I can see a trade like this especially if they are struggling on offense. It would fill a big need. But, I do not think that DD will give up swihart. More likely cv. Unless blake does not progress towards being the everyday catcher that they would like. Also think their stockpile of relief pitching, hembree/barnes, or starters,owens/elias could go instead. Paul G would also provide a bridge and provide an option in 2 yrs on whether they need to keep hanley. I think their bigger more immediate need is what happens with Pablo and whether he stays. He still has a BIG hill to climb.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 12, 2017 6:19:38 GMT -5
I can see a trade like this especially if they are struggling on offense. It would fill a big need. But, I do not think that DD will give up swihart. More likely cv. Unless blake does not progress towards being the everyday catcher that they would like. Also think their stockpile of relief pitching, hembree/barnes, or starters,owens/elias could go instead. Paul G would also provide a bridge and provide an option in 2 yrs on whether they need to keep hanley. I think their bigger more immediate need is what happens with Pablo and whether he stays. He still has a BIG hill to climb. I think Swihart will probably have to be included to get a deal done. I can see the Sox signing Lucroy the offseason after if they have to lose Swihart via trade. Paul Goldshmidt would also keep the Sox under the tax threshold if he was traded here, which is a goal of the Sox this year. The more I think of this, the more I see it as a huge possibility come July. Both he and Jose Abreau fit this category of people they could be looking to acquire via trade. Maybe even Jonathan Lucroy too if the Rangers are out of the playoff race in July for some strange reason.
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Jan 12, 2017 6:49:27 GMT -5
I can see a trade like this especially if they are struggling on offense. It would fill a big need. But, I do not think that DD will give up swihart. More likely cv. Unless blake does not progress towards being the everyday catcher that they would like. Also think their stockpile of relief pitching, hembree/barnes, or starters,owens/elias could go instead. Paul G would also provide a bridge and provide an option in 2 yrs on whether they need to keep hanley. I think their bigger more immediate need is what happens with Pablo and whether he stays. He still has a BIG hill to climb. I think Swihart will probably have to be included to get a deal done. I can see the Sox signing Lucroy the offseason after if they have to lose Swihart via trade. Paul Goldshmidt would also keep the Sox under the tax threshold if he was traded here, which is a goal of the Sox this year. The more I think of this, the more I see it as a huge possibility come July. Both he and Jose Abreau fit this category of people they could be looking to acquire via trade. Maybe even Jonathan Lucroy too if the Rangers are out of the playoff race in July for some strange reason. abreau would be an interesting option and would probably cost less than Goldschmidt. Lucroy would be interesting but it would depend on money.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 12, 2017 8:04:55 GMT -5
Goldschmidt is one of the most valuable assets in baseball. It would take a Chris Sale-type package to acquire him. The Red Sox don't really have the prospects to put together that kind of package unless they're willing to include Benintendi.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 12, 2017 9:38:20 GMT -5
zero point zero chance of happening unless you're including Mookie or Xander.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 12, 2017 13:49:40 GMT -5
My guess is that we see a trade of Mitch Moreland, Blake Swihart, Sam Travis, and a lower level prospect for Paul Goldshmidt. My guess is that another team would be willing to beat that offer if the Diamondbacks are dealing Goldschmidt.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 12, 2017 14:50:00 GMT -5
zero point zero chance of happening unless you're including Mookie or Xander. Everyone said the same exact thing about Sale.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 12, 2017 14:53:38 GMT -5
Goldschmidt is one of the most valuable assets in baseball. It would take a Chris Sale-type package to acquire him. The Red Sox don't really have the prospects to put together that kind of package unless they're willing to include Benintendi. I disagree. While Goldshmidt is valuable, he's a first base only player. His offense is what separates him from most, but he's about to be entering his 30's too. He's not what he was worth say 2-3 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 12, 2017 15:54:01 GMT -5
Goldschmidt is projected to put up 4.2 wins next year in his age 29 season. He has three years of team control left at a total of $34.3M.
Sale is projected to put up 4.8 wins next year in his age 28 season. He has three years of team control left at a total of $38M.
Goldschmidt is slightly worse and a year-and-a-half older. But he's also less of an injury risk and slightly less expensive. He'll come cheaper than Sale, but only by a very slight margin. If the Red Sox offered, say, Benintendi, Devers and Swihart, the Diamondbacks might listen. But that's the caliber of package that it would take.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 13, 2017 5:01:42 GMT -5
While I do think Goldshmidt is valuable, I don't think his value is that high. There are a redundant amount of right handed first power even on the free agent market versus the market of a starter the caliber of Sale. Trumbo, Bautista, Napoli, Chris Carter. I can't name one pitcher that has been on the market like a Sale, and if you do find that pitcher, he's probably already in his 30's.
I just think there would be less of a market for a Goldshmidt versus a starter. Could any team use a Goldshmidt? Sure but come trade deadline, if a team had a option of trading a Quintana versus a Goldshmidt, I think they'd take the starting pitcher 10 times out of 10, unless you're in the position of not needing a starter like the Sox are currently in right now.
It's a lot easier to get a Goldshmidt versus a Sale so comparing the two in terms of trade value doesn't do much. If you want to compare anyone to Goldshmidt, compare him to Dozier who is getting nothing in terms of trade value right now because baseball is littered with good second baseman, just like baseball is littered with good right handed power first baseman.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 13, 2017 5:05:35 GMT -5
Also, offering Benintendi, Devers, and Swihart would be more than what the Sox traded for to get Sale who you already acknowledged was the better player and was worth more.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 13, 2017 13:05:03 GMT -5
Paul Goldschmidt being redundant because Chris Carter is available is a pretty terrible take.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 13, 2017 17:44:33 GMT -5
No I'm not saying that Chris Carter is even close to what Goldshmidt is, just saying what Goldshmidt represents is out there in abundance. Right handed power in his 30's is out there by the handful. That's what Goldshmidt is. That's why I don't think Goldshmidt is one of the most valuable commodities in baseball. His age has started to really take away from most his value.
Forget Chris Carter. Shouldn't even listed him. There are plenty of examples of a Goldshmidt type out in free agency out there.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 13, 2017 17:47:41 GMT -5
My main point was to look at the Dozier market and use it as a example to why Goldshmidt doesn't hold as much value as everyone else thinks here.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 13, 2017 18:47:14 GMT -5
Goldschmidt has 22.6 fWAR in the last 4 seasons and would likely have another 3 if he wasn't hurt in 2014 when he only had 4.3 in 109 games. That is the most in baseball for 1B and 3rd for all position players. If you're arguing that he's in a steep decline because of his last season where he only had 4.8 fWAR, then go ahead and make that point. I tend to think he'll bounce back because of his track record and age.
I mean he has been at least as good of a hitter as Papi. This is one crazy thread.
|
|