Author Topic: Harper trade speculation (breakout from off-season thread)  (Read 21134 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline UMDNats

  • Posts: 14656
This is the  "2017-2018 Off-season Discussion Thread".  If it was the "should we trade Harper thread" I wouldn't complain, I'd just ignore the thread.  I don't want to ignore it because there might occasionally be a post based on reality.  This trade Harper discussion is pure fantasy.  Could the Mods please move it all to another thread  please?

yeah we can talk fantasy trades all we want, but in reality we can't trade harper

Offline bluestreak

  • Posts: 6111

Trading Harper makes perfect sense but only if they acquired Stanton who is under contract for years at a lower costs than what Harper will cost and is more clutch with the bat in critical situations.

If your talking playoffs asking "What has HArper done to help us win is a legitimate inquiry but anyone who thinks I spout heresy may  feel free to block me

I mean you can argue that Ginacarlo Stanton hasn't had a high leverage at bat in his entire career. I wouldn't argue that, I think he's great. But it's not like playing in Miami is a pressure cooker. I think his contract is too rich and he is the type of player that will age poorly. And the way his contract is structured, if he performs like you hope he will, he will opt out, and if he sucks, you are on the hook for a ton of dead money.

Offline LoveAngelos

  • Posts: 908
Exactly how do we measure clutch?

What has he done in the playoffs  other than when  faceing Hunter Strickland?
I look for a player who says he is worth more than 400 million to lead a team to the finish line. He hasn't done that and I think he is incapable of doing that because his interests are me first oriented. Just an opinion. I don't do sabermetrics; I don't pay attention to stataholics. My orientation is figures lie and liers figure. I'll never forget the man who drowned in water with an average depth of 8 inches

Online varoadking

  • Posts: 23603
  • Monsters of da Midway
What has he done in the playoffs...

You could ask that same question about Max since he's been here...


Offline LoveAngelos

  • Posts: 908
You could ask that same question about Max since he's been here...


True dat

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 45598
  • thanosdidnothingwrong
You could ask that same question about Max since he's been here...


Agreed. However, you could ask the same thing of Kershaw.

Offline Optics

  • Posts: 9209
You could ask that same question about Max since he's been here...

Max was great in Game 3. Unfortunately he melted down in Game 5, but I've never been a fan of starters coming in for relief.

Offline LoveAngelos

  • Posts: 908
Agreed. However, you could ask the same thing of Kershaw.


I seem to recall, but I am over 60 and subject to selective-----if any---recollection, Kershaw single handedly beat the Nats in game 5 in 16

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19630

I seem to recall, but I am over 60 and subject to selective-----if any---recollection, Kershaw single handedly beat the Nats in game 5 in 16

The list of pitchers beating the nats in the playoffs is long and not particularly distinguished

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 45598
  • thanosdidnothingwrong

I seem to recall, but I am over 60 and subject to selective-----if any---recollection, Kershaw single handedly beat the Nats in game 5 in 16
The list of pitchers beating the nats in the playoffs is long and not particularly distinguished
This.

Kershaw had a 4 run lead in Game 5 and choked it all away. Kershaw has an ERA over 4 in the postseason. If Max is getting called out for his postseason performances, Kershaw deserves it just as much.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 25617
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession

I seem to recall, but I am over 60 and subject to selective-----if any---recollection, Kershaw single handedly beat the Nats in game 5 in 16
Jansen pitched the tougher stretch.  Kershaw got the save, right?

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 25617
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession

I seem to recall, but I am over 60 and subject to selective-----if any---recollection, Kershaw single handedly beat the Nats in game 5 in 16
This.

Kershaw had a 4 run lead in Game 5 and choked it all away. Kershaw has an ERA over 4 in the postseason. If Max is getting called out for his postseason performances, Kershaw deserves it just as much.
Game 4 was his blow up. game 5 was the 2 out save.

Online nfotiu

  • Posts: 2268
Man, you guys are putting way too much weight into a small sampling of playoff performances.   Is past playoff performance any kind of reliable predictor of future playoff performances?  Everyone thought Cliff Lee was the most amazing playoff pitcher ever and then he wasn't.  Strasburg had a rep of being a snowflake when it mattered, and now all of a sudden he's mister clutch.   I'm sure regular season performance is a much better predictor for future playoff success.   Probably the most key factor is the ability to be healthy and strong going into the playoffs.   Strasburg was this year, and Scherzer and Harper weren't.   Next year, it could be the opposite, or the same.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 25617
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
This is almost ZDK territory, but would you consider Harper + for Stanton?  That + we can speculate on, but 10 years of Stanton at $295MM is better than what you will sign Harper to.

Putting Harper in a deal allows Jeter to deal Bryce down the stretch for maybe more than he can get for Stanton since Harper comes with no long term obligations.  Worse comes to worse, Jeter would get the comp picks if they contend this year, they go all in, and he keeps Harper instead of dealing him.  Short of that, Harper could get you Chapman-level stuff at the deadline.

Stanton's opt out worries me, but that's going to lead to other teams limiting what they would put in a deal.  For most teams, the cost would be a limiting factor too, but for the Nats, he's a cheaper alternative to Harper.  I have no idea what the + would be, but if it were say Fedde and Carter Kieboom (that is, one guy I suspect is in the 2d quarter of the top 100 and another guy who is on the fringe of the top 100), I would think that might do it given the expectation that Harper then gets flipped by the Marlins for more high-tier prospects down the stretch.

Online nfotiu

  • Posts: 2268
This is almost ZDK territory, but would you consider Harper + for Stanton?  That + we can speculate on, but 10 years of Stanton at $295MM is better than what you will sign Harper to.

Putting Harper in a deal allows Jeter to deal Bryce down the stretch for maybe more than he can get for Stanton since Harper comes with no long term obligations.  Worse comes to worse, Jeter would get the comp picks if they contend this year, they go all in, and he keeps Harper instead of dealing him.  Short of that, Harper could get you Chapman-level stuff at the deadline.

Stanton's opt out worries me, but that's going to lead to other teams limiting what they would put in a deal.  For most teams, the cost would be a limiting factor too, but for the Nats, he's a cheaper alternative to Harper.  I have no idea what the + would be, but if it were say Fedde and Carter Kieboom (that is, one guy I suspect is in the 2d quarter of the top 100 and another guy who is on the fringe of the top 100), I would think that might do it given the expectation that Harper then gets flipped by the Marlins for more high-tier prospects down the stretch.
I always have seen that as a possibility too.   It makes a lot of sense for all parties involved.  Getting Stanton definitely soften the blow to the fans heartbreak of losing Harper.  Stanton would be happy to come here, I'd think.  Marlins shed the contract, which is the most important thing to them.

Offline NJ Ave

  • Posts: 3236

Stanton's opt out worries me, but that's going to lead to other teams limiting what they would put in a deal.

Stanton's opt-out is, to me, the best part of his deal.

You're telling me you have a chance at 3 years of prime Stanton for just $77 million? Sign me up.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19630
Stanton's opt-out is, to me, the best part of his deal.

You're telling me you have a chance at 3 years of prime Stanton for just $77 million? Sign me up.

You also have the risk of the additional years if anything goes wrong

Offline Expos

  • Posts: 655
This is almost ZDK territory, but would you consider Harper + for Stanton?  That + we can speculate on, but 10 years of Stanton at $295MM is better than what you will sign Harper to.

Putting Harper in a deal allows Jeter to deal Bryce down the stretch for maybe more than he can get for Stanton since Harper comes with no long term obligations.  Worse comes to worse, Jeter would get the comp picks if they contend this year, they go all in, and he keeps Harper instead of dealing him.  Short of that, Harper could get you Chapman-level stuff at the deadline.

Stanton's opt out worries me, but that's going to lead to other teams limiting what they would put in a deal.  For most teams, the cost would be a limiting factor too, but for the Nats, he's a cheaper alternative to Harper.  I have no idea what the + would be, but if it were say Fedde and Carter Kieboom (that is, one guy I suspect is in the 2d quarter of the top 100 and another guy who is on the fringe of the top 100), I would think that might do it given the expectation that Harper then gets flipped by the Marlins for more high-tier prospects down the stretch.

It will take more than Fedde and Kieboom.

Honestly, I'd trade Robles straight up for Stanton and then flip Harper for a prospect.

An outfield of Stanton - Taylor - Eaton would be dynamic.

1- Turner
2- Stanton
3- Murphy
4- Zimmerman
5- Rendon
6- Taylor
7- Eaton
8- Catcher

5 legit MVP calibre bats at the top of the lineup. Wow

Online nfotiu

  • Posts: 2268
I doubt he'd use the opt outs for financial reasons.  I suspect sports salaries are peaking right now, and will start their correction in the next couple years as the RSN bubble bursts.     That would more likely come into play if he's in a crappy situation (like a perpetually uncompetitive Marlins team).

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22094
It will take more than Fedde and Kieboom.

Honestly, I'd trade Robles straight up for Stanton and then flip Harper for a prospect.

An outfield of Stanton - Taylor - Eaton would be dynamic.

1- Turner
2- Stanton
3- Murphy
4- Zimmerman
5- Rendon
6- Taylor
7- Eaton
8- Catcher

5 legit MVP calibre bats at the top of the lineup. Wow

In this insane hypothetical, that's not the lineup:

Turner
Eaton
Stanton
Murphy
Rendon
Zim
Taylor/Weiters/Severino
Weiters/Severino/Taylor

Online Elvir Ovcina

  • Posts: 2428
Stanton's opt-out is, to me, the best part of his deal.

You're telling me you have a chance at 3 years of prime Stanton for just $77 million? Sign me up.

Yes, but the way that contract is weighted, I wouldn't expect him to opt out.  Do you expect him to be in a position to get 7/218 (counting the buyout of the 8th year) as a 32 year old?  That's pretty close to Pujols-level bad in terms of contracts for 32-year-old MVP-level hitters.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 25617
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Yes, but the way that contract is weighted, I wouldn't expect him to opt out.  Do you expect him to be in a position to get 7/218 (counting the buyout of the 8th year) as a 32 year old?  That's pretty close to Pujols-level bad in terms of contracts for 32-year-old MVP-level hitters.
JD is only going to be 30 or 31, I think, this year. Let's see what he gets.  A healthy Stanton a year or two older probably should get more.  He plays better D than JD.  That may be more the comp than Pujols.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 45598
  • thanosdidnothingwrong
Game 4 was his blow up. game 5 was the 2 out save.
Kershaw started Game 5: https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/HOU/HOU201710290.shtml

Dodgers got out to a 4 nothing lead and then Kershaw gave it all back in the 4th and 5th innings.

Stanton's opt-out is, to me, the best part of his deal.

You're telling me you have a chance at 3 years of prime Stanton for just $77 million? Sign me up.

It's not a team opt out, it's a player opt out. After that season, he will still have a contract for at least 8 years and 218 million. I'm seriously doubting at that point that age 30, Stanton will be in line for more money than that.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 25617
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Kershaw started Game 5: https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/HOU/HOU201710290.shtml
I thought LoveAngelos was talking about Gaem 5 of 2016, not the Houston series.

I seem to recall, but I am over 60 and subject to selective-----if any---recollection, Kershaw single handedly beat the Nats in game 5 in 16

Online Elvir Ovcina

  • Posts: 2428
JD is only going to be 30 or 31, I think, this year. Let's see what he gets.  A healthy Stanton a year or two older probably should get more.  He plays better D than JD.  That may be more the comp than Pujols.

Martinez is barely 30.  Now that we're returning to normal hitter aging curves, 32 is a lot different than 30.  I'm not sure Stanton 2 years from now will be a better defender than JD is now, which is the defensive comparison.  Also, I wouldn't assume a "healthy" Stanton.  The freak face injury aside, the dude's had a number of problems with his legs, and he's the size of a small truck - not great for the knees.