203 replies to this topic

[CantonJester]

1. Doesn’t matter. I’m talking about a similar age player and contribution (WAR) to wins. If anything, this signals the return for Adley would be worse as Donaldson plays a more sought after position.

2. Please do name some other trades of 26-28 y/o All-Stars off of winning teams, that it worked out for that team. I’ll wait.

 

Donaldson has always been a player teams get rid of rather than package for equal talent in return. Guy’s been a cancer in the clubhouse everywhere he’s played. 

[Mike in STL]

Donaldson has always been a player teams get rid of rather than package for equal talent in return. Guy’s been a cancer in the clubhouse everywhere he’s played.

So the A’s took a crappy deal in return for a 28 y/o multiple time AS with two years of control left because he sucks in the clubhouse. Is that your story?

Still looking for examples of teams trading superstars with multiple years of team control left and it working out. Donaldson is the only comp that comes to mind. Clearly didn’t work out.

[makoman]

So the A’s took a crappy deal in return for a 28 y/o multiple time AS with two years of control left because he sucks in the clubhouse. Is that your story?

Still looking for examples of teams trading superstars with multiple years of team control left and it working out. Donaldson is the only comp that comes to mind. Clearly didn’t work out.

Soto had 2.5 years left. Abrams and Gore are already producing and James Wood is a top prospect in MLB.

 

Miguel Cabrera had I think 2 years left and was traded with Dontrelle Willis for multiple top 10 prospects, though it didn't really work out.

 

Mark Teixeira had 1.5 years left and was traded for Elvis Andrus, Neftali Feliz, Matt Harrison, and Jarrod Saltalamacchia.

 

Bartolo Colon had 1.5 years of control left and was traded for Cliff Lee, Brandon Phillips, Grady Sizemore, and Lee Stevens.

 

Matt Holliday had 1 year left and was traded for Carlos Gonzalez and Huston Street.

 

Brian Giles had 2.5 years leftl and was traded for Jason Bay and Oliver Perez.

 

All could be considered as working out to some extent. Soto is most recent and getting 3 guys who were at one time top 10 prospects (plus Hassell was top 50) would be ideal, if you had to trade him.

[BSLChrisStoner]

So the A’s took a crappy deal in return for a 28 y/o multiple time AS with two years of control left because he sucks in the clubhouse. Is that your story?

Still looking for examples of teams trading superstars with multiple years of team control left and it working out. Donaldson is the only comp that comes to mind. Clearly didn’t work out.

Was the A's intent to try and win in the immediate years following the Donaldson trade?
Or did they recognize they were in for a downturn, and wanted to get back as much talent / control as they could (even if the return didn't pan out)? 

Your point that teams don't typically trade stars with multiple years of control, is fine. 
 

But every situation is different obviously.

The O's ownership changing, probably changes the conversation as well. 

Still not excited about doing what it would take to extend Adley.... but if the overall team spend is going to be league average and above, obviously that gives you a lot more flexibility to handle his AAV and build out the remaining roster. 

 

 

Cleveland traded Lindor before '21, made the playoffs in '22.  Lindor only had 1 year of control when traded. 

Rays traded Longoria before '18, he was never as good, and 32 year.... but did have 5 years left on his deal, and was probably Tampa's best player ever at that time.  The Rays have been to the post-season 5 times since. 

 

Seattle traded Griffey in Feb. '00...  Mariners got to the playoffs in '00, and won 116 games in '01. Believe he was on his last year.

 

 

Maybe Cleveland and Seattle get more for Lindor and Junior if they make those trades earlier, and with more team control remaining.

[Mike in STL]

Soto had 2.5 years left. Abrams and Gore are already producing and James Wood is a top prospect in MLB.

 

Miguel Cabrera had I think 2 years left and was traded with Dontrelle Willis for multiple top 10 prospects, though it didn't really work out.

 

Mark Teixeira had 1.5 years left and was traded for Elvis Andrus, Neftali Feliz, Matt Harrison, and Jarrod Saltalamacchia.

 

Bartolo Colon had 1.5 years of control left and was traded for Cliff Lee, Brandon Phillips, Grady Sizemore, and Lee Stevens.

 

Matt Holliday had 1 year left and was traded for Carlos Gonzalez and Huston Street.

 

Brian Giles had 2.5 years leftl and was traded for Jason Bay and Oliver Perez.

 

All could be considered as working out to some extent. Soto is most recent and getting 3 guys who were at one time top 10 prospects (plus Hassell was top 50) would be ideal, if you had to trade him.

Soto is looking like it could be good return. High ceilings on those guys.

 

But where did the Nats go? 107 losses. 91 losses. That was the other part of my point. They traded Donaldson off a team that had 94, 96, and 88 wins. Then won 68 the following year. The Nats were toast, so they traded Soto. The other part of my point was that teams that are winning, and intend on continuing to win, don't trade off their superstars to acquire more farm depth. 

 

People want to trade Adley with 2 years control left because a prospect is currently mashing A-ball. Essentially saying without saying the phrase I hate the most, "easily replaceable". Basallo could be great. Could not be. Wieters tore up the minor leagues, was on the cover of SI, and he sucked. (Fine, never lived up to the expectations). Machado, numbers were very pedestrian in AA, but has been a very very good hitter since day 1, about to enter year 13. Maybe there is more to it than numbers.

 

Not that it matters but Donaldson absolutely raked until the ripe old age of 36 when he fell off a cliff. Scenery changes, being a jerk I guess, and all. Others think that cliff comes at 30, or earlier now. For gods sake don't let Adley turn 30!!!

 

To be completely honest, the Orioles are finally good, I don't want to entertain the discussion of trading our superstars who barely have played two seasons. Have that discussion in two more years when the picture is clearer. How soon do we want to discuss when to trade Jackson Holliday? There is a world that exists where Adley and Basallo are on the same MLB team. It doesn't have to be one or the other. 

[Mike in STL]

Was the A's intent to try and win in the immediate years following the Donaldson trade?
Or did they recognize they were in for a downturn, and wanted to get back as much talent / control as they could (even if the return didn't pan out)? 

Your point that teams don't typically trade stars with multiple years of control, is fine. 
 

But every situation is different obviously.

The O's ownership changing, probably changes the conversation as well. 

Still not excited about doing what it would take to extend Adley.... but if the overall team spend is going to be league average and above, obviously that gives you a lot more flexibility to handle his AAV and build out the remaining roster. 

 

 

Cleveland traded Lindor before '21, made the playoffs in '22.  Lindor only had 1 year of control when traded. 

Rays traded Longoria before '18, he was never as good, and 32 year.... but did have 5 years left on his deal, and was probably Tampa's best player ever at that time.  The Rays have been to the post-season 5 times since. 

 

Seattle traded Griffey in Feb. '00...  Mariners got to the playoffs in '00, and won 116 games in '01. Believe he was on his last year.

 

 

Maybe Cleveland and Seattle get more for Lindor and Junior if they make those trades earlier, and with more team control remaining.

Thats a good question. The A's also traded Cespedes for Jonny Gomes and Jon Lester. But Lester was a rental as he went to FA in 2015. Graveman was a piece back in the Donaldson deal and he slotted into the #4 SP spot behind Gray, Chavez, Kazmir, the same top 3 SPs from 2014. They also let Jed Lowrie walk in FA after 2014. Head scratching moves, IMO.  Hard to tel what the A's intent was, other than shed payroll, which is what they do.

 

Change in ownership I hope changes the conversation. Extension please.

 

You're talking about the Mariners should have traded Griffey in what, 1992-1993? I don't think I can even wrap my head around that and I'm not even a Mariners fan. 

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Soto is looking like it could be good return. High ceilings on those guys.

 

But where did the Nats go? 107 losses. 91 losses. That was the other part of my point. They traded Donaldson off a team that had 94, 96, and 88 wins. Then won 68 the following year. The Nats were toast, so they traded Soto. The other part of my point was that teams that are winning, and intend on continuing to win, don't trade off their superstars to acquire more farm depth. 

 

People want to trade Adley with 2 years control left because a prospect is currently mashing A-ball. Essentially saying without saying the phrase I hate the most, "easily replaceable". Basallo could be great. Could not be. Wieters tore up the minor leagues, was on the cover of SI, and he sucked. (Fine, never lived up to the expectations). Machado, numbers were very pedestrian in AA, but has been a very very good hitter since day 1, about to enter year 13. Maybe there is more to it than numbers.

 

Not that it matters but Donaldson absolutely raked until the ripe old age of 36 when he fell off a cliff. Scenery changes, being a jerk I guess, and all. Others think that cliff comes at 30, or earlier now. For gods sake don't let Adley turn 30!!!

 

To be completely honest, the Orioles are finally good, I don't want to entertain the discussion of trading our superstars who barely have played two seasons. Have that discussion in two more years when the picture is clearer. How soon do we want to discuss when to trade Jackson Holliday? There is a world that exists where Adley and Basallo are on the same MLB team. It doesn't have to be one or the other. 

Agree but there is no denying that having Bassalo kicking butt so far definitely impacts the discussion of how you deal with Adley. Doesn't mean you end up doing something you wouldn't otherwise but Bassalo is still a factor when thinking ahead.

[BSLChrisStoner]

People want to trade Adley with 2 years control left because a prospect is currently mashing A-ball. 

 

Having Basallo existing in the organization as a top prospect would make it easier to trade Adley imo; but it's not the reason why you would trade Adley, and I don't think that argument has been made. 

 

You can extend Adley and win.
You can trade Adley and win. 

 

There are ramifications either way. 

If you extend him - to the contract it would take - his contract will take up x amount of the resources you allocate. 

I happen to think that even if Angelos had stayed the owner, that the payroll would have gone up to around league average the next few years.... but now that he's gone, we don't have to even think about that. 

With 3 billionaires being new owners, and figuring to want to spend, it's a safe bet imo that the O's spend near league averages (and maybe higher) soon. 

So, whatever deal you would give Adley would be lower utilization of the resources available.

Good. 

Then you still have to decide how comfortable you are with him as he ages.
A lot of his value is tied to being a catcher.
If you limit his time catching, does he hit enough at 1st / DH?
Do you want him at 1st and DH for x amount of games, given the other overall composition of the team?

Etc. 
Do you want to extend him partially because of the on-field production, and partially because of leadership, name recognition, signal to the fans, etc?

 

If you think about all those things, and want to sign him, cool. 

If you think about all those things, and would want to trade him...  you'd rather move him with 2 years of control vs. 1. 

 

 

I thought a deal had a chance to happen with Angelos.
I'm pretty sure a deal will happen with the new Owners. 

That's fine. 

[Mike in STL]

Agree but there is no denying that having Bassalo kicking butt so far definitely impacts the discussion of how you deal with Adley. Doesn't mean you end up doing something you wouldn't otherwise but Bassalo is still a factor when thinking ahead.

It's a good problem to have. Not much else to discuss. Guy mashed A-ball. Hope he keeps it up through extended looks at the next levels, and again, they can both be on this team. 

[BSLChrisStoner]

You're talking about the Mariners should have traded Griffey in what, 1992-1993? I don't think I can even wrap my head around that and I'm not even a Mariners fan. 

 

He was traded in Feb. 2000.  Maybe he should have been traded before the '99 season. 

[Mike in STL]

Having Basallo existing in the organization as a top prospect would make it easier to trade Adley imo; but it's not the reason why you would trade Adley, and I don't think that argument has been made. 

 

You can extend Adley and win.
You can trade Adley and win. 

 

There are ramifications either way. 

If you extend him - to the contract it would take - his contract will take up x amount of the resources you allocate. 

I happen to think that even if Angelos had stayed the owner, that the payroll would have gone up to around league average the next few years.... but now that he's gone, we don't have to even think about that. 

With 3 billionaires being new owners, and figuring to want to spend, it's a safe bet imo that the O's spend near league averages (and maybe higher) soon. 

So, whatever deal you would give Adley would be lower utilization of the resources available.

Good. 

Then you still have to decide how comfortable you are with him as he ages.
A lot of his value is tied to being a catcher.
If you limit his time catching, does he hit enough at 1st / DH.
Do you want him at 1st and DH for x amount of games, given the other overall composition of the team. 

Etc. 
Do you want to extend him partially because of the on-field production, and partially because of leadership, name recognition, signal to the fans, etc.

 

If you think about all those things, and want to sign him, cool. 

If you think about all those things, and would want to trade him...  you'd rather move him with 2 years of control vs. 1. 

 

 

I thought a deal had a chance to happen with Angelos.
I'm pretty sure a deal will happen with the new Owners. 

That's fine. 

I think about all those things and want to extend him.

[Mike in STL]

He was traded in Feb. 2000.  Maybe he should have been traded before the '99 season. 

But you're comparing it to our guy who you want to trade 4 years into his career. Griffey was 11 years in in 1999.

 

If they extend Adley, I'll be happy to talk trade possibilities in 2033.

[makoman]

I definitely disagree with Chris on the idea of saying today "I'd like to trade Adley in 2 years." It's pointless IMO. I am ok with keeping open the idea of trading anybody at any time, but why decide things now that are two years away? Basallo could become a monster. Or maybe somehow he can't hit a AAA breaking ball and you have no one but a marginal C to step in. You don't necessarily need a replacement at the time, but it helps, and you can figure it out later. If Adley continues to be good and you have a reasonable replacement at the time definitely consider all your options, especially if at the time in the winter after 2025 you know you aren't extending him. But if he helps us compete for the WS in 2027 that's not the worst thing in the world either. A guy leaving for a comp pick sucks in some ways, but it isn't bad if he helped you win in his last year. And if he's good and you can extend you have him and Basallo in 2028-31 or something, all the better. 

[BSLChrisStoner]

But you're comparing it to our guy who you want to trade 4 years into his career. Griffey was 11 years in in 1999.

If they extend Adley, I'll be happy to talk trade possibilities in 2033.

And again, each situation is completely unique.
The Mariners financial situation (and MLB as a whole) obviously different during KGJ's first contract vs. today.

(Yes, more money in the game today, and frankly every team has larger revenue streams, etc.... but not everyone is going to spend like LA, and the disparity from the have and have nots has only increased.)

I showed the KGJ trade, because you asked when has a team traded a star, and still competed.
Yes, he didn't have two years left on his deal, but he was still a star obviously, traded, and they continued to compete.
That's the point.

You made an argument several times in this thread that if the O's traded Adley, that would mean they weren't trying to win.
I don't agree with that premise at all.

All of these hypothetical arguments now change though because of the ownership change.

Before, I could think the spending was eventually going to go up even with Angelos, but that was only a guess and would like everyone else would need to see it first. Even believing it would go up, obviously he'd have limits. If you (the O's) were going to operate with limits, and their is only so much pie to go around, you have to think about how much pie you want to give Adley.

For me, he's lower on the totem pole, and I think if you were continuing to operate in that space (only so much pie) the more prudent thing to do would be to trade him vs try to extend him.

With spending definitely (I guess I shouldn't say definitely, but definitely) going up, I'm more indifferent.
I still don't love the idea, but it's that much easier to make it work.

[BSLChrisStoner]

I definitely disagree with Chris on the idea of saying today "I'd like to trade Adley in 2 years." It's pointless IMO. I am ok with keeping open the idea of trading anybody at any time, but why decide things now that are two years away? Basallo could become a monster. Or maybe somehow he can't hit a AAA breaking ball and you have no one but a marginal C to step in. You don't necessarily need a replacement at the time, but it helps, and you can figure it out later. If Adley continues to be good and you have a reasonable replacement at the time definitely consider all your options, especially if at the time in the winter after 2025 you know you aren't extending him. But if he helps us compete for the WS in 2027 that's not the worst thing in the world either. A guy leaving for a comp pick sucks in some ways, but it isn't bad if he helped you win in his last year. And if he's good and you can extend you have him and Basallo in 2028-31 or something, all the better. 

 

Again, everything changes now with the ownership change.  
Basically you can keep a more open mind about things. 

If you were going to continue to operate in that Angelos era, I think you would have to be more....  I don't know what the correct word is... maybe definitive? Not sure of the correct descriptor. 

 

But basically the idea being if the Angelos era was continuing, and I'm Elias... and I think my payroll is never going to be above mid-tier, and could maybe continue to be lower 1/3, or below... then I'm going to have to operate more black and white.  Better to move Adley before his final year of control, get back a haul of talent and control + not having spent the Adley AAV, and try and extend the run that way.  And ohh I've got a top prospect ready to take his place? Even better. 

 

Now, Elias doesn't have to do that. 
If the spending is now mid-tier to upper 1/3; he can basically do anything he want, and have a larger margin of error. 

[makoman]

Again, everything changes now with the ownership change.  
Basically you can keep a more open mind about things. 

If you were going to continue to operate in that Angelos era, I think you would have to be more....  I don't know what the correct word is... maybe definitive? Not sure of the correct descriptor. 

 

But basically the idea being if the Angelos era was continuing, and I'm Elias... and I think my payroll is never going to be above mid-tier, and could maybe continue to be lower 1/3, or below... then I'm going to have to operate more black and white.  Better to move Adley before his final year of control, get back a haul of talent and control + not having spent the Adley AAV, and try and extend the run that way.  And ohh I've got a top prospect ready to take his place? Even better. 

 

Now, Elias doesn't have to do that. 
If the spending is now mid-tier to upper 1/3; he can basically do anything he want, and have a larger margin of error. 

That's fair. Under Angelos I think you really need to optimize. Like the Rays. I hope that's not the case now.

[Mike in STL]

I’ll just summarize my stance once again without all the BS to go with it.

If the Orioles keep winning, Adley will not be traded to stock the farm.

If Adley is traded to stock the farm, it means the Orioles are losing.

The Orioles, or any team for that matter, can win or lose with or without any one player. But baseball teams that are winning, and would like to continue to, don’t trade cost controlled All-Star caliber guys.

[CantonJester]

So the A’s took a crappy deal in return for a 28 y/o multiple time AS with two years of control left because he sucks in the clubhouse. Is that your story?

 

It's not so much my story as it is how things went down surrounding Josh Donaldson. 

 

Still looking for examples of teams trading superstars with multiple years of team control left and it working out. Donaldson is the only comp that comes to mind. Clearly didn’t work out.

 

As for teams trading superstar players with years of control remaining and it working out? 

 

Roberto Alomar & Joe Carter were flipped for Fred McGriff and Tony Fernandez.

 

Also, Gary Sheffield was flipped out of SD for Trevor Hoffman out of Miami. Hoffman built a HoF career as the closer for the Pads, and Sheff won a WS with the Marlins. 

 

JD Drew was traded for a young Adam Wainwright, too. 

 

Doyle Alexander was traded for a scuffling AA pitcher named John Smoltz. Doyle was lights out for the Tigers as they reached the ALCS, and yeah Smoltz turned out OK in Atlanta. 

[Mike in STL]

Out of that whole group, Drew with one year of control left in a package to land Wainwright in a a package is the closet thing to what I’m talking about.

Alomar wasn’t a superstar yet and Carter was 30. The Padres did not improve.

Sheffield, also sucked early on and SD was his second team, traded to FLA in year 6.

Christ I had to look up who Doyle Alexander was. Superstar I think not. He was an Oriole and I’d never heard of him. Thanks for pulling out names from the early 70s. Was also 36 when traded for Smoltz. I’m talking about comps to wanting trade a player who is 27-28 with two years+ control left, on a contender, and expect to keep seriously contending without them.

[CantonJester]

Out of that whole group, Drew with one year of control left in a package to land Wainwright in a a package is the closet thing to what I’m talking about.

Alomar wasn’t a superstar yet and Carter was 30. The Padres did not improve.

Sheffield, also sucked early on and SD was his second team, traded to FLA in year 6.

Christ I had to look up who Doyle Alexander was. Superstar I think not. He was an Oriole and I’d never heard of him. Thanks for pulling out names from the early 70s. Was also 36 when traded for Smoltz. I’m talking about comps to wanting trade a player who is 27-28 with two years+ control left, on a contender, and expect to keep seriously contending without them.

 

So what exactly is your argument? That MLB isn't Madden Football where you trade the best players with your buddies? 

 

I guess you're a young buck, but Doyle Alexander was traded 1987 mid-season from Atlanta to Detroit and proceeded to go 9-0 in 11 starts to finish out the season, helping the Tigers to outlast the Blue Jays to win the AL East. The Braves clearly got better (longterm) as did the Tigers (short term). Hell, Alexander had been a good SP for the Blue Jays in the mid 80s, who flipped him to Atlanta for a young Duane Ward who would be one of the shutdown arms in the Jays' pen when they won back-to-back WS titles in the early 90s.