Totte though Byrd would be a good 4th OF option for them as they traded Ethier a while ago. And do you mean not enough of a return for me? And I'm not really sure how to add onto the deal and keep it realistic. I could add another pitcher, but I didn't think they'd give up Urias and Pederson, so I went with Pederson and Lee, plus a solid bullpen option. What else do you think I could add and keep it realistic?
MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
Totte though Byrd would be a good 4th OF option for them as they traded Ethier a while ago. And do you mean not enough of a return for me? And I'm not really sure how to add onto the deal and keep it realistic. I could add another pitcher, but I didn't think they'd give up Urias and Pederson, so I went with Pederson and Lee, plus a solid bullpen option. What else do you think I could add and keep it realistic? -
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
Want to gauge this for realism. I want to go ahead and explore trading Sale to try and speed up the rebuild of th ChiSox. I haven't started spring training yet. I looked at who the interest came from for Price and Sale over the off season. KC is obviously going for win now and tried for Price. LAD had some discussion but would not part with Seager for him. I don't want any doubt before I pull the trigger.
Thoughts on Sale for something like Zimmer, Duffy, Mondesi, Bonafacio?
Sale for Joc Pedersen, Urias, Seager, ZLee?
Sale to Texas for NRamirez, Sardinas, Alfaro, or something?Chicago Cubs | Chicago Bulls | Green Bay Packers | Michigan WolverinesComment
-
Comment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
Totte though Byrd would be a good 4th OF option for them as they traded Ethier a while ago. And do you mean not enough of a return for me? And I'm not really sure how to add onto the deal and keep it realistic. I could add another pitcher, but I didn't think they'd give up Urias and Pederson, so I went with Pederson and Lee, plus a solid bullpen option. What else do you think I could add and keep it realistic?Chicago Cubs | Chicago Bulls | Green Bay Packers | Michigan WolverinesComment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
I liked your original proposal minus the addition Marlon Byrd, who would add to an already overcrowded and old OF.Chicago Cubs | Chicago Bulls | Green Bay Packers | Michigan WolverinesComment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
I think just Pederson alone is too pessimistic. Remember that the Dodgers use Monopoly money so a few tens of millions of dollars won't really stop them.
I liked your original proposal minus the addition Marlon Byrd, who would add to an already overcrowded and old OF.
Ok so Lee to LAD for Pederson, Zach Lee, and Dominguez? Is that asking for too many of their top prospects?Comment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
Trust me, they would lol"Twelve at-bats is a pretty decent sample size." - Eric ByrnesComment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
The Dodgers are in hyper aggressive win-at-all-costs mode so I don't really see an issue. Add Lee to a rotation with Kershaw an Co. and they'd have that playoff rotation ready to go.
Cliff Lee's contract (IRL anyway) is $25 MM this year, $25 MM next year, and a $27 MM vesting option in '16, which he's likely to achieve imo. So, if you deal in mid 2014, that's 2.5 years of Lee for $60-65 MM. Add an additional $20-25 MM to an already $240 MM payroll--I don't see why they wouldn't because they're already into the tax anyway.
Cliff Lee is also a guy, who although he's 35, he could probably pitch at a high level for another 4-5 years just because his delivery is so tricky and his command is ridiculous. Lee has walked 9 batters in 68 IP so far this year and has a ridiculous 1.3 BB/9 since going to, of all places, Philly.
You really just have to look yourself in the mirror bwoodring, and ask yourself if you want to deal Cliff Lee today, lol.Chicago Cubs | Chicago Bulls | Green Bay Packers | Michigan WolverinesComment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
I don't think so. Remember the Dodgers were too stubborn to trade any of those guys for Dempster or Garza when the Cubs were in those agonizing talks a couple of years back, but Cliff Lee is different.
The Dodgers are in hyper aggressive win-at-all-costs mode so I don't really see an issue. Add Lee to a rotation with Kershaw an Co. and they'd have that playoff rotation ready to go.
Cliff Lee's contract (IRL anyway) is $25 MM this year, $25 MM next year, and a $27 MM vesting option in '16, which he's likely to achieve imo. So, if you deal in mid 2014, that's 2.5 years of Lee for $60-65 MM. Add an additional $20-25 MM to an already $240 MM payroll--I don't see why they wouldn't because they're already into the tax anyway.
Cliff Lee is also a guy, who although he's 35, he could probably pitch at a high level for another 4-5 years just because his delivery is so tricky and his command is ridiculous. Lee has walked 9 batters in 68 IP so far this year and has a ridiculous 1.3 BB/9 since going to, of all places, Philly.
You really just have to look yourself in the mirror bwoodring, and ask yourself if you want to deal Cliff Lee today, lol.Comment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
I believe you, you'd know better as a TOR fan. I am just going with what I read earlier trying to research comps. It ambiguously stated Sanchez and Stroman so it could have meant both - it was stated by hearsayComment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
I did say both. The Blue Jays would deal both Stroman and Sanchez, among others, for Chris Sale. And that's not even the best the Sox could do."Twelve at-bats is a pretty decent sample size." - Eric ByrnesComment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
I think so but I am the dissenting opinion. Lee's value is dimished and contrary to popular belief, they don't want to trade prospects and run rich for too long. But, they may think otherwise with a chance at Lee even if his salary reduces his value to one B, the market could look different with Lee out there.Comment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
Cliff Lee worth one B? Holy no. You guys realize he's /worth/ his salary, right? 4.0 fWAR/180. That's an ace. Aces get paid 20+ million. He's older, but his statistical profile is one that ages well. As long as he's not injured like IRL, I have no concerns. I don't think that's even enough, personally."Twelve at-bats is a pretty decent sample size." - Eric ByrnesComment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
No, I meant what I read in Price rumors was they wouldn't do both because of his rising salary and lessening years of control.Comment
-
Re: MLB 14 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread
The Jays would kill for David Price. They'd be morons for doing so, as he isn't that great, but eh."Twelve at-bats is a pretty decent sample size." - Eric ByrnesComment
Comment