MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
-
Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread
Thinking about a package of
Judge, Sanchez, Refsnyder, Gardner and Wade for Stanton. Marlins get a surplus of prospects plus someone to replace Stanton's spot in the Outfield.
Could I get anything for Chase Headley? I'd be willing to take on a bloated contract. Perhaps a back of the rotation arm?
Comment
-
Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread
So who's a stable first baseman I could get to the Indians? Would like someone who can do everything well but doesn't have to be a super star, would like to avoid trading Naquin/Zimmer, Frazier or Aiken. Would like to try to do a straight player swap with Santana and a smaller add on my sideComment
-
Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread
You need to offer more for Stanton. Something like Judge, Severino, Mateo, Bird, etc. And I don't the Marlins would want Gardner back in a Stanton trade. Because by trading Stanton they are showing they don't give a **** and want to rebuild again, which in turn would mean trading away Fernandez as well. And build around Yelich and Gordon and whatever prospects they get for Stanton and Fernandez.Thinking about a package of
Judge, Sanchez, Refsnyder, Gardner and Wade for Stanton. Marlins get a surplus of prospects plus someone to replace Stanton's spot in the Outfield.
Could I get anything for Chase Headley? I'd be willing to take on a bloated contract. Perhaps a back of the rotation arm?Comment
-
Former modder of "Ultimate Rosters" for MVP Baseball 2005.
Comment
-
Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread
Washington is offering me Michael Taylor + Tyler Moore to me (Blue Jays) for AJ Jimenez + Andy Burns.
Moore is hitting .200 in AAA
Taylor is playing a 4th OF role. Burns is hitting .242 in AAA and can play anywhere on the field. Jimenez is hitting .217 in AAA.
Moore and Burns would be depth pieces for both teams. Jimenez would be backup C because Loboton went down and Taylor would be a platoon option with Saunders. I like it but it seems like I should be giving more.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkComment
-
Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread
Well every deal doesn't have to involve trout or santon lol. Just don't wanna rip off the Cpu
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkComment
-
Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread
What's the logic for the other team to trade their better first baseman to you for one that you don't want? You'll need to dip into your prospects or trade away some other position of value (a pitcher perhaps) to get something done here.So who's a stable first baseman I could get to the Indians? Would like someone who can do everything well but doesn't have to be a super star, would like to avoid trading Naquin/Zimmer, Frazier or Aiken. Would like to try to do a straight player swap with Santana and a smaller add on my sideChicago Cubs | Chicago Bulls | Green Bay Packers | Michigan WolverinesComment
-
Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread
Well, Santana is quite cheap. I could see a Hanley or Holliday swap, maybe?"Twelve at-bats is a pretty decent sample size." - Eric ByrnesComment
-
Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread
Okay. Maybe this one is more significant. What about Pompey + Happ + Vlad Guerrero Jr to the Reds for Bruce + Cingrani
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkComment
-
Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread
Illegal on 2/3 counts and an overpay and why would the Reds want Happ
Try to consider what the other team is looking for specifically instead of packaging several parts together."Twelve at-bats is a pretty decent sample size." - Eric ByrnesComment
-
Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread
It won't be illegal in a few months. It's pretty much Bruce for Pompey and Vlad JR. I thought that was a fair price considering he was going cheap according to reports. Happ is there for cap reasons and he could be shipped by the Reds to get another prospect?
If that's not the case I guess I will have to revisit...Comment

Comment