Consolidated trade deadline thread

[jays76]

If we could get Lester for say a package of Norris, Pompey, and Nolin I'd say hell yeah! Is it steep for 2 months of Lester? Probably. But we hold on to Sanchez & Stro and there is minimal monetary risk to Rogers, everybody wins (if we do in fact make the playoffs, if not then clearly it was an overpay). We're in a unique position to make a run at the AL East/Wildcard and beyond. With this scenario they don't cough up too much money and they don't gut our farm but they do give themselves a legitimate shot to go for it. I think this is a must risk and the time is now!

[baubau]

If we could get Lester for say a package of Norris, Pompey, and Nolin I'd say hell yeah! Is it steep for 2 months of Lester? Probably. But we hold on to Sanchez & Stro and there is minimal monetary risk to Rogers, everybody wins (if we do in fact make the playoffs, if not then clearly it was an overpay). We're in a unique position to make a run at the AL East/Wildcard and beyond. With this scenario they don't cough up too much money and they don't gut our farm but they do give themselves a legitimate shot to go for it. I think this is a must risk and the time is now!

 

Slowly back away from what ever it is you are smoking my friend. Even if the Jays decide to give up arguably 2 out of our top 3-5 prospects they should be getting back someone with at least more than 2 months of control. You are either undervaluing the package you are offering or overrating Lester.

[pickoff22]

If we could get Lester for say a package of Norris, Pompey, and Nolin I'd say hell yeah! Is it steep for 2 months of Lester? Probably. But we hold on to Sanchez & Stro and there is minimal monetary risk to Rogers, everybody wins (if we do in fact make the playoffs, if not then clearly it was an overpay). We're in a unique position to make a run at the AL East/Wildcard and beyond. With this scenario they don't cough up too much money and they don't gut our farm but they do give themselves a legitimate shot to go for it. I think this is a must risk and the time is now!

 

I'd have a tough time watching two of our top 5 prospects go for a rental. Hell everyone went bat s*** when we did that for Dickey, a guy who we had 4 years of control of on a ridiculously affordable contract. Sure, Lester's amazing but that's a steep steep price

[KingKat]

They bid on Tanaka.

 

Is there evidence of this? Is it any more credible than Shi Davidi saying they didn't have the money for Santana?

[jays76]

Slowly back away from what ever it is you are smoking my friend. Even if the Jays decide to give up arguably 2 out of our top 3-5 prospects they should be getting back someone with at least more than 2 months of control. You are either undervaluing the package you are offering or overrating Lester.

 

Don't get me wrong if we could give them Jairo Labourt, John Stilson, and Matt Smoral I would also say hell yeah! But that's probably going to be the cost or something like it and like I said we're in a unique position here. In acquiring Lester we also get the QO and draft pick compensation if/when he leaves so that helps a little. I probably am smoking a little something though, I'm dreaming about a deep playoff run and maybe an outside shot of us re-signing him too.

[TheCrimeDog]

Long time lurker, first time poster. I just couldn't hold my tongue on this one.

 

Trading any of our top 5 prospects for Lester or any other impending free agent would be a terrible, short-sighted mistake. I'm shocked that anyone would fathom giving up 3 of our top prospects for what, 10 regular season starts and maybe a few post season starts? There is very little chance of keeping Lester beyond this season and, because he would be acquired via trade, there would be no draft pick compensation for him.

 

I'm all for improvements but giving up that kind of ransom is high risk for low reward.

[pickoff22]

Don't get me wrong if we could give them Jairo Labourt, John Stilson, and Matt Smoral I would also say hell yeah! But that's probably going to be the cost or something like it and like I said we're in a unique position here. In acquiring Lester we also get the QO and draft pick compensation if/when he leaves so that helps a little. I probably am smoking a little something though, I'm dreaming about a deep playoff run and maybe an outside shot of us re-signing him too.

 

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but we wouldn't pick up the draft pick compensation if we got him.

[TheCrimeDog]

On another note, why not take a run at Oakland and try to pry Tommy Milone away from them? He may be costly in terms of what Oakland wants in return, but he is young, completely affordable, controllable and has pitched very well in his career to date. Certainly he is a beneficiary of pitching in Oakland, but as a 3rd or 4th option for the Jays he would be a solid pick up considering everything else. Not sure what the cost would be.

[IBTrini]

Someone posted these earlier:

 

 

http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb...ferral-report/

 

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/04/05...o-sign-santana

 

http://www.tsn.ca/mlb/story/?id=448624

Thanks for the links. I don't want to keep harping on the same thing over and over cuz I do not have concrete evidence to support my point either.

 

Sportsnet: Shi Davidi does not state how he came up with the fact that the BlueJays couldn't come up with the money other than saying it came from multiple sources. He most probably had confirmation from the players identified that they were willing to defer part of their salary so that Santana could be signed however when Anthopoulos was pressed for clarification surrounding Santana's situation Anthopoulos simply stated that he had an agreement in place and how it was being structured was irrelevant. Snot-nosed Davidi then gets his panties in a knot and say the need to borrow money from players against future payroll leaves all to wonder why he wasn't able to raise money on his own. Anthopoulos had no reason to go off on a tangent to clarify his strategy so that was his way of shutting it down. Davidi then goes on by throwing figures around but fleetingly mentioning that Anthopoulos spent the winter trying to make other deals (Kinsler/Anderson) which fell through. He was not able to confirm the deals fell through cuz of payroll which would have gone a long way in supporting his article.

 

Toronto Sun: What can really be said about Elliott? He is regurgitating information second hand - Reyes confirmed Rosenthal's story that some Jays players had discussion about deferring portions of their salaries (nobody really disputes this took place). Then he throws this little tidbit into the flames "Word in the corporate hallways is that there may be more money coming the Jays way at the trade-deadline if they happen to be factors (some will currently see this as relevant) but not before the team shows what it can do with the 10th highest payroll (limping through to the deadline with lot of injuries yet still in the thick of things could be a sign to show management what the team is capable of doing). Nothing in his article supports the Jays not having money for additional payroll.

 

TSN: Another spin off of Rosenthal's story but this time however embellished with the MLBPA's involvement by another unknown source - "Everyone had signed off, it was already done". Then he goes on to state "According to the Associated Press... but it is unknown if the team is willing to take on more salary if the need were to arise." REALLY? Does he even know which side of the fence he should be sitting on?

 

We can go over multiple links and still not have concrete evidence that Rogers does not have, or is not willing to spend additional, money so let's drop this till there is something stating otherwise by a knowledgeable source.

 

If it was tl;dr then don't waste time saying so.

[jays76]

Long time lurker, first time poster. I just couldn't hold my tongue on this one.

 

Trading any of our top 5 prospects for Lester or any other impending free agent would be a terrible, short-sighted mistake. I'm shocked that anyone would fathom giving up 3 of our top prospects for what, 10 regular season starts and maybe a few post season starts? There is very little chance of keeping Lester beyond this season and, because he would be acquired via trade, there would be no draft pick compensation for him.

 

I'm all for improvements but giving up that kind of ransom is high risk for low reward.

 

It is very high but it's also a very small window right now for this team, however I didn't realize we lose the draft pick compensation via trade. I've caught a lot of flack on this site for undervaluing prospects when bundling them in trade scenarios but we saw what the notoriously frugal A's had to give up for the Shark and personally I commend them for pulling the trigger. It's all about having the right timing and seizing that opportunity when it presents itself, these windows sometimes take years to unfold.

 

What would you give up for him, or who else would you pursue? The frustrating part is Rogers lack of willingness to take on salary (or appearances of being this way).

[KingKat]

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but we wouldn't pick up the draft pick compensation if we got him.

 

Correct. You have to play a one season with the the team for it to get comp (I'm not sure what the exact threshold of roster time constitutes one season, probably similar to extra 2). That's why Morales and Drew waited so long. If they weren't going to get long term deals, they wanted to at least get out from the compensation system.

[TheCrimeDog]

What would you give up for him, or who else would you pursue? The frustrating part is Rogers lack of willingness to take on salary (or appearances being this way).

 

The A's move for Shark made far more sense, regardless of what they gave up, mainly for 3 reasons:

 

1. They were the best team in the AL at the time (the strong get stronger)

2. They made the trade earlier in the season and have Shark for more starts this season

3. They also have Shark for next season at a very reasonable price - accordingly they can let him go to FA and take the compensation pic or trade him mid-summer to a contender for prospects

 

As far as a starter, I would honestly look at Tommy Milone from Oakland. I know they want him as insurance but I'm sure they'd move him for the right price (which would be much less then your proposal for Lester). In addition, Milone would be under control for several more years at would looks to be a bargain price.

 

I don't think their biggest need is pitching. Looking at this roster as is today, if they could upgrade any of 2B, 3B or CF I think they have to do it, especially if the player is someone who will be around next season. Looking at next season, it's very possible that Melky and Colby are gone and we still don't have a decent option at 2B. Any trade they make now, if it involves our top prospects, has to be as much about tomorrow as it does today. I agree the window is very small (especially considering their roster as it stands for next season). I want them to win right now too but, fact is, they may have to stand pat and hope this team plays the way it did in May going into August and September. Honestly, getting all of Lawrie, EE and Lind back (or any of them) will represent huge additions at this point in and of themselves.

[Daniel Labude]

If we could get Lester for say a package of Norris, Pompey, and Nolin I'd say hell yeah! Is it steep for 2 months of Lester? Probably. But we hold on to Sanchez & Stro and there is minimal monetary risk to Rogers, everybody wins (if we do in fact make the playoffs, if not then clearly it was an overpay). We're in a unique position to make a run at the AL East/Wildcard and beyond. With this scenario they don't cough up too much money and they don't gut our farm but they do give themselves a legitimate shot to go for it. I think this is a must risk and the time is now!

 

If we are trading that package for Lester we will be last place for the next 5 years. For Price maybe, but not a chance in hell for 2 months of Lester

[IBTrini]

I made it very clear it's a matter of taking the information you have and using it to come up with a reasonable assumption. The players making that offer and going to the players union can't be ignored. It's a powerful piece of the puzzle. And although some might choose to ignore it, I don't. You don't think Bautista or the players have a better idea then we do about what sorts of financial limitations the team has?

 

Why else would they offer a deferral especially when Bautista is so connected to the front office? Just to sign another Dominican is the only reason I can think of. But if AA just didn't think he was worth 14 million then what would a deferral accomplish - it's still 14 million that Rogers pays eventually for him.

When you approach your boss for a raise or even for him to take on additional staff does he set up an appointment with you to go over the company's financial position so you can have a better idea that it might not be a good idea? If so, tell me who you work for cuz that's one special company.

 

The information I believe you have is (1) the players made the offer and (2) it was presented to the players union.

 

Why did the players make that offer? Did they hear from the FO that there was no money or did that filter down to them thru the media/blogs/forums/social media? Did Anthopoulos have a discussion with Bautista and/or other Jays players to brainstorm a solution and this came up?

 

Who presented it to the players union? Was it the FO or the players? If it was the FO, could they be seeing this as a good way to stretch their budget in that they may still have more available money down the road?

 

I guess I am too skeptical so I like to see confirmation by identifiable sources rather than these blowhards who need to stir crap up all the time with false information.

[IBTrini]

Well at least prior to 2013 you had front office come right out and state there were instances of missed signings. Beltran not coming here because of the turf as an example. They flat out said that there were times they were the highest bidder for free agents but couldn't get the deal done.

 

You sure didn't have that this offseason.

 

And I don't recall there ever being a case prior to 2013 of players offering to defer salary in order to sign any of the free agents they were targeting.

 

The link you provided earlier does mention a player offering to give up a portion of his salary to keep another player on the team so it is not something new even though the association declined the suggestion at that time.

 

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/04/05/blue-jays-players-wanted-to-defer-portions-of-salary-to-try-to-sign-santana

[jays76]

The A's move for Shark made far more sense, regardless of what they gave up, mainly for 3 reasons:

 

1. They were the best team in the AL at the time (the strong get stronger)

2. They made the trade earlier in the season and have Shark for more starts this season

3. They also have Shark for next season at a very reasonable price - accordingly they can let him go to FA and take the compensation pic or trade him mid-summer to a contender for prospects

 

As far as a starter, I would honestly look at Tommy Milone from Oakland. I know they want him as insurance but I'm sure they'd move him for the right price (which would be much less then your proposal for Lester). In addition, Milone would be under control for several more years at would looks to be a bargain price.

 

I don't think their biggest need is pitching. Looking at this roster as is today, if they could upgrade any of 2B, 3B or CF I think they have to do it, especially if the player is someone who will be around next season. Looking at next season, it's very possible that Melky and Colby are gone and we still don't have a decent option at 2B. Any trade they make now, if it involves our top prospects, has to be as much about tomorrow as it does today. I agree the window is very small (especially considering their roster as it stands for next season). I want them to win right now too but, fact is, they may have to stand pat and hope this team plays the way it did in May going into August and September. Honestly, getting all of Lawrie, EE and Lind back (or any of them) will represent huge additions at this point in and of themselves.

 

In regards to the Shark I think it made all of the sense in the world for them and also for us at the time (I believe we were leading the AL East), I take my hats off to the A's organization. The only thing comparable to that for us now is perhaps Cole Hamels if the Phillies are willing to eat salary as reported but I still couldn't see the Jays manning up and pulling the trigger (also I don't know if he's got a no-trade clause for here).

 

I agree with your Milone proposal, I think he'd be a great addition if we can usurp him from the A's but I think that would be a very difficult proposition.

 

I disagree with you here though, although I feel they are definite needs and especially going into the off season the Valencia trade and the return of Reimold, Lind, Lawrie, and EE as you mentioned should fill these holes. For the time being I think we need pitching help more, I feel we need a top 3 starter to bolster this lineup. We just don't have the horses right now to seriously compete in the playoffs (if we even make it there) unless we catch lightening in a bottle by having our supposed top 2 of Buerhle & Dickey play at their best and our young guns of Stro & Hutch play up to their potential consistently from here on out without any dips. It's a slippery slope imo..

Edited July 29, 2014 by jays76

[KingKat]

The only thing comparable to that for us now is perhaps Cole Hamels if the Phillies are willing to eat salary as reported but I still couldn't see the Jays manning up and pulling the trigger (also I don't know if he's got a no-trade clause for here).

 

Wouldn't Price be a better comparable? Both Price and Shark have the same amount of control. Hamels is actually under contract until 2018.

[TheCrimeDog]

In regards to the Shark I think it made all of the sense in the world for them and also for us at the time (I believe we were leading the AL East at the time), I take my hats off to the A's organization.

 

We definitely agree on this - the A's moved when the Jays should have moved. Whether it was Shark, or someone else, the Jays really should have bolstered their roster when they were on fire. They have waited so long at this point that they'll be really relying on that new player (if they make a move) rather then simply bolstering their line up the way Oakland did.

 

As far as Hamels, you can't compare dealing for him with the A's dealing for Shark. Shark is making less than $5.5 million this season and, even with arbitration next season, will be unlikely to make even half of what Hamels is already signed to which is more than $20 mil per season through 2018. That contract, combined with the aquisition cost a Hamels trade would require, makes Cole a very unlikely option for any team, let alone the Jays.

 

I agree with needing a top 3 starter however this team, outside of 3 or 4 batters, is very inconsistent and strikeout prone. I don't trust going into the playoffs with Francisco, Rasmus and some of the other K-machines playing everyday but that's just me.

[KingKat]

We definitely agree on this - the A's moved when the Jays should have moved. Whether it was Shark, or someone else, the Jays really should have bolstered their roster when they were on fire. They have waited so long at this point that they'll be really relying on that new player (if they make a move) rather then simply bolstering their line up the way Oakland did.

 

As far as Hamels, you can't compare dealing for him with the A's dealing for Shark. Shark is making less than $5.5 million this season and, even with arbitration next season, will be unlikely to make even half of what Hamels is already signed to which is more than $20 mil per season through 2018. That contract, combined with the aquisition cost a Hamels trade would require, makes Cole a very unlikely option for any team, let alone the Jays.

 

I agree with needing a top 3 starter however this team, outside of 3 or 4 batters, is very inconsistent and strikeout prone. I don't trust going into the playoffs with Francisco, Rasmus and some of the other K-machines playing everyday but that's just me.

 

Jays don't seem to have a lot of payroll room now but they have a lot of money coming off the books so those future commitments to Hamels might be quite workeable actually. It really depends what kind of break the Phillies want to give the Jays on the upfront cost.

[jays76]

Wouldn't Price be a better comparable? Both Price and Shark have the same amount of control. Hamels is actually under contract until 2018.

 

 

No doubt, I would rather Price but I'm assuming he's off the market. If he becomes available within the next 48hrs I would be all over that!

[TheCrimeDog]

Jays don't seem to have a lot of payroll room now but they have a lot of money coming off the books so those future commitments to Hamels might be quite workeable actually. It really depends what kind of break the Phillies want to give the Jays on the upfront cost.

 

For sure - it also stands to reason that they just may not want Hamels on that deal 4 years from now. And yes, a lot of money is coming off the books but they will be looking for at least 2 outfielders, 1 infielder and a starter while simultaneously looking to upgrade both their bullpen and their bench.

 

The Jays are a super 'top heavy' team - lots of all star talent but the drop off from their stars to their everyday guys is drastic. Combine that with a poor bullpen and a bad bench, as well as very little positional help in the minors anywhere, and their depth as a whole is very concerning.

 

Any trades involving significant Jays assets for this season need to make them better in the upcoming seasons as well.

[Governator]

Pretty sure the scenario has gone something like this: Red Sox talked to Lester in the Winter and said we're going to low ball you an offer this Spring to create a buzz, flip you in the summer for a haul of prospects and give you your real contract in November. Are you a team player Jon?

[pickoff22]

When you approach your boss for a raise or even for him to take on additional staff does he set up an appointment with you to go over the company's financial position so you can have a better idea that it might not be a good idea? If so, tell me who you work for cuz that's one special company.

 

The information I believe you have is (1) the players made the offer and (2) it was presented to the players union.

 

Why did the players make that offer? Did they hear from the FO that there was no money or did that filter down to them thru the media/blogs/forums/social media? Did Anthopoulos have a discussion with Bautista and/or other Jays players to brainstorm a solution and this came up?

 

Who presented it to the players union? Was it the FO or the players? If it was the FO, could they be seeing this as a good way to stretch their budget in that they may still have more available money down the road?

 

I guess I am too skeptical so I like to see confirmation by identifiable sources rather than these blowhards who need to stir crap up all the time with false information.

 

 

I thought you were done with this

 

I hear everything you're saying, but I can't imagine anyone would discount the sequence of events in the way you appear to be. Everything still points to it being more than likely that money was a concern. I don't need Rogers to come out and say "Yes, we have asked the Blue Jays front office to maintain payroll around current levels" because a) that would never happen and I have enough information to come to a perfectly reasonable conclusion without them saying so.

 

You really think that players are reading blogs and then decide amongst themselves to involve 5 players on a deferral plan and then go to the players union without ever going to the front office in between? That's just not a logical sequence of events and of all the players involved I'm sure one would have the common sense to just say "hey, let's talk to Alex about this". Especially considering Alex is as close to the players as he is.

 

And yes I have approached management about hiring capabilities. More than once. If there's talent that could help our company I need to get an idea of what sort of resources we have in terms of being able to extend an offer. So that's actually a perfect example - I wouldn't concoct a plan to hire this person without approaching management first. Just like if the players wanted Santana, they would approach management about it to see what sort of resources there were available. That's actually really a perfect example for thanks for bringing it up, because in my industry there are cycles when expenses are closely monitored so hiring budgets can be tight or non-existent – just like they likely were for the Jays in the offseason.

 

And when you asked "If it was the FO, could they be seeing this as a good way to stretch their budget in that they may still have more available money down the road?" - well this example would be exactly what I suspect - that money is an issue and something that is being scrutinized. Otherwise they woudn't be worrying about the budget and taking such a drastic step of approaching the players union wouldn't occur. You say the other option would be the players approaching the union, but as stated above, that sequence of events doesn't seem probable at all.

 

Again, it's about making a reasonable assumption based on all the information you have. The information we have clearly points to it being more likely that AA has fairly tight financial restrictions and limitations that he needs to work with then the opposite. This doesn't mean we should hate ownership as our payroll is a good size, but we have a front office working with the limitations given to them.

 

And the example from 20 years ago of Molitor lending a helping hand isn't relevant to the era that Moogy was referring to that I was responding to.

[jays76]

Any trades involving significant Jays assets for this season need to make them better in the upcoming seasons as well.

 

I don't disagree but what pitcher fits that mold besides Price & Hamels? If not you'd have to consider a rental like Lester and hope you can acquire him without getting squeezed too badly. Or you can stand pat and hope all the ducks line up with our injured players returning and the team catching lightening in a bottle to continue playing well and making the playoffs. And if that did happen I would fully expect this organization to open up their pocketbooks in the off season, if they cheap out now and luck into the playoffs there will be no excuses that will be acceptable next off season.

[jays76]

How anyone wants to unload the vault for a 2 month rental is beyond me.

 

You should be watching Tim & Sid today..

[burlingtonbandit]

I just stopped posting about Rogers not having money because no matter what evidence was brought up there would still be people saying they won't believe it.

 

Its like saying you don't know for sure Ray Rice beat up his fiancee in the elevator even though there is a video of him dragging her unconscious body out by her hair. You can pretty well say because of her being dragged out unconscious that she was beated but untill you see the video you don't know she was.

[pickoff22]

I just stopped posting about Rogers not having money because no matter what evidence was brought up there would still be people saying they won't believe it.

 

Its like saying you don't know for sure Ray Rice beat up his fiancee in the elevator even though there is a video of him dragging her unconscious body out by her hair. You can pretty well say because of her being dragged out unconscious that she was beated but untill you see the video you don't know she was.

 

I feel as though part of it is that some people just like to defend the organization at all costs. And I'm often defending the team of FO because Toronto has many delusional and bitter fans. But this isn't a case of the ownership doing anything "wrong" - they can limit payroll as they see fit and have a healthy payroll for this year. But it doesn't change the fact that there are limitations in place.

[burlingtonbandit]

You should be watching Tim & Sid today..

 

I love Tim Micallef but him suggesting he would trade Stroman for Lester straight up is terrible. 2 months of Lester for 6 years of Stroman would be awful and not a large enough improvement even in the short term.

[burlingtonbandit]

I feel as though part of it is that some people just like to defend the organization at all costs. And I'm often defending the team of FO because Toronto has many delusional and bitter fans. But this isn't a case of the ownership doing anything "wrong" - they can limit payroll as they see fit and have a healthy payroll for this year. But it doesn't change the fact that there are limitations in place.

 

Exactly. Rogers can do what they want, it is their team. Even though I don't agree with that strategy as I think an extra few million $ right now could make them tens of millions in the next few years.

[KingKat]

I feel as though part of it is that some people just like to defend the organization at all costs. And I'm often defending the team of FO because Toronto has many delusional and bitter fans. But this isn't a case of the ownership doing anything "wrong" - they can limit payroll as they see fit and have a healthy payroll for this year. But it doesn't change the fact that there are limitations in place.

 

Moogy doesn't really defend the organization at all costs. He's very argumentative but to his credit, he doesn't really seem to have any set targets. He just very stubbornly defends whatever side of a particular argument he's on.