MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

[BigOscar]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Not convinced the Dodgers give up Bellinger for a rental of a starting pitcher, they are already stacked at SP as it is and they seem to have big plans for Bellinger

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Most everyone will say Darvish isnt enough but in my opintion if you give a B prospect instead of a C then its a done deal. I like to look back at the Chapman to cubs for Torres trade which the cubs got a closer for a year and you are giving up a Starter for a year for roughly the same price

Id say throw in Taveras and then its a deal.

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Most everyone will say Darvish isnt enough but in my opintion if you give a B prospect instead of a C then its a done deal. I like to look back at the Chapman to cubs for Torres trade which the cubs got a closer for a year and you are giving up a Starter for a year for roughly the same price

Not convinced the Dodgers give up Bellinger for a rental of a starting pitcher, they are already stacked at SP as it is and they seem to have big plans for Bellinger

I know sale was not a rental but everyone thought the Red Sox had huge plays for Moncada and he was untouchable as well

[MrSerendipity]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Id say throw in Taveras and then its a deal.

I think Texas would walk away from that deal. They think pretty highly of Taveras.

[MrSerendipity]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

So switching gears here and moving away from Bellinger, is it safe to assume that PITT wouldn't be willing to move Bell in a deadline deal for Darvish if they're contending? I know they're on the fence right now trying to decide if they're buyers or sellers this year. But I've heard them mixed up in rumors for Quintana so I wasn't sure if they would make a move for Darvish. Quintana is under contract whereas Darvish would be a rental barring their ability to resign him. One of my primary focuses in a return for Darvish is trying to find a solid everyday first baseman. Texas hasn't had one since we dealt Teixeira. But I know that Pitt thinks very highly of Bell, as they should.

[kenp86]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I know sale was not a rental but everyone thought the Red Sox had huge plays for Moncada and he was untouchable as well

You said it. Sale wasnt a rental so it adds value and takes value from Yu. So the Dodgers wouldnt give up their stud in bellinger. But maybe a Pittsburgh team might trade Bell for him in sone sort of package deal

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I think Texas would walk away from that deal. They think pretty highly of Taveras.

I get that but he is the #55 prospect and it doesnt help that the texas farm system isnt the greatest to pull off a trade like this without giving up one of their top guys. You only have two players in the top 100 and none in the top 50. Taveras is still at least 3-4 years away and alot can happen in that time frame.

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

You said it. Sale wasnt a rental so it adds value and takes value from Yu. So the Dodgers wouldnt give up their stud in bellinger. But maybe a Pittsburgh team might trade Bell for him in sone sort of package deal

Which is why I said he would need to at the very least add Tareras. but I agree Bell could be traded for a little easier than Bellinger

[BigOscar]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

So switching gears here and moving away from Bellinger, is it safe to assume that PITT wouldn't be willing to move Bell in a deadline deal for Darvish if they're contending? I know they're on the fence right now trying to decide if they're buyers or sellers this year. But I've heard them mixed up in rumors for Quintana so I wasn't sure if they would make a move for Darvish. Quintana is under contract whereas Darvish would be a rental barring their ability to resign him. One of my primary focuses in a return for Darvish is trying to find a solid everyday first baseman. Texas hasn't had one since we dealt Teixeira. But I know that Pitt thinks very highly of Bell, as they should.

Why not just play Gallo there?

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

So switching gears here and moving away from Bellinger, is it safe to assume that PITT wouldn't be willing to move Bell in a deadline deal for Darvish if they're contending? I know they're on the fence right now trying to decide if they're buyers or sellers this year. But I've heard them mixed up in rumors for Quintana so I wasn't sure if they would make a move for Darvish. Quintana is under contract whereas Darvish would be a rental barring their ability to resign him. One of my primary focuses in a return for Darvish is trying to find a solid everyday first baseman. Texas hasn't had one since we dealt Teixeira. But I know that Pitt thinks very highly of Bell, as they should.

You could trade Darvish and Guzman for Bell IMO

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Why not just play Gallo there?

Good point. I was just fixated on thinking of a trade and forgot about Gallo

[MrSerendipity]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Why not just play Gallo there?

I could but that puts me in a position in which I'm having to center a Darvish deal around a young 3B prospect which IMO, tend to cost more. My only options there are Devers (BOS), Senzel (CIN) or Arroyo (SF). Boston won't move Devers and Cincinnati doesn't have any motivation to be dealing prospects for a rental pitcher. That leaves Arroyo and SF, who I'm not high on and I'm not sure SF would even want to make that deal.

[Tdoyle2021]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I could but that puts me in a position in which I'm having to center a Darvish deal around a young 3B prospect which IMO, tend to cost more. My only options there are Devers (BOS), Senzel (CIN) or Arroyo (SF). Boston won't move Devers and Cincinnati doesn't have any motivation to be dealing prospects for a rental pitcher. That leaves Arroyo and SF, who I'm not high on and I'm not sure SF would even want to make that deal.

Toronto with Vlad Guerrero Jr. might be worth it down the road. Not sure if they'd be interested in that either though.

[kenp86]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I could but that puts me in a position in which I'm having to center a Darvish deal around a young 3B prospect which IMO, tend to cost more. My only options there are Devers (BOS), Senzel (CIN) or Arroyo (SF). Boston won't move Devers and Cincinnati doesn't have any motivation to be dealing prospects for a rental pitcher. That leaves Arroyo and SF, who I'm not high on and I'm not sure SF would even want to make that deal.

Not playing Beltre there? And what about profar at third?

[MrSerendipity]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Toronto with Vlad Guerrero Jr. might be worth it down the road. Not sure if they'd be interested in that either though.

Guerrero Jr. is definitely of interest. I had forgotten that Toronto moved him to 3rd. That said, Toronto went out of their way to acquire Guerrero Jr. so I don't know how willing they would be to part with him, you know? But I definitely like that option if I could stomach seeing Yu pitch for Toronto.

Not playing Beltre there? And what about profar at third?

I'm future proofing. Beltre likely retires in a year or two, I'm not sure if anyone has simmed a season or two to see when exactly that will happen. Moving Profar concerns me as the game doesn't seem to favor moving people around too much. Had Profar still been listed an IF in this game I would be more open too it but given they have him listed as an OF now, I think he'd take a big production hit. With that said, if I could pull a top OF prospect, I would definitely be open to going that direction.