Jump to content
Jays Centre
  • Create Account

Recommended Posts

Posted
Scott Alexander to Dodgers, part of a 3 team trade. He's a ground ball machine with 5 years of control, seems like a nice pickup to go in their bullpen.
  • Replies 8.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
Edmonds, Lofton, Kevin Brown...anyone else a major snub? Thank god Raines and Blyleven got in, at least and hopefully Edgar too. How do you name a f***ing award after a guy and not put him in the Hall?

 

Mussina so far.

Posted
Indians interested in moving Salazar for relief help.

 

That's kinda weird... he seems like he'd be an excellent reliever if they committed him to that role.

Posted
That's kinda weird... he seems like he'd be an excellent reliever if they committed him to that role.

 

Seems like that would be more simple. Maybe they think a team would value Salazar (the SP) enough to offer a reliever who is better than what they'd project from Salazar as a RP, but I agree it's a weird idea.

Posted
Seems like that would be more simple. Maybe they think a team would value Salazar (the SP) enough to offer a reliever who is better than what they'd project from Salazar as a RP, but I agree it's a weird idea.

 

Maybe it has to do with respecting the player's own desire to start rather than relieve? I mean he is an established starter and I couldn't blame him for opposing a move to the bullpen.

Posted
I mean he is an established starter

 

The thing that's most established is that he hasn't demonstrated durability as a starter. He's a 20 start starter.

Posted
We match up really well with them in a trade.

 

What about Salazar and Naquin for Osuna+?

 

Would you do Salazar for Osuna 1 to 1.

 

You would have a rotation with huge upside.

Posted
Would you do Salazar for Osuna 1 to 1.

 

You would have a rotation with huge upside.

 

I think they both have 3 years of control left right? It would really depend on what I thought of Salazar's medicals. Salazar carries a lot more risk, but could turn out to be better over those three years. The market for good relievers is pretty insane right now. For elite relievers it's pretty nuts. It's close but I probably wouldn't do it.

Posted
The thing that's most established is that he hasn't demonstrated durability as a starter. He's a 20 start starter.

 

That's still enough for him to find employment as a starter with another team. If the Indians see more value in what good reliever could he provides as a starter is makes sense to trade him and avoid the uncertainty and pushback that might come with a transition.

Posted
I think they both have 3 years of control left right? It would really depend on what I thought of Salazar's medicals. Salazar carries a lot more risk, but could turn out to be better over those three years. The market for good relievers is pretty insane right now. For elite relievers it's pretty nuts. It's close but I probably wouldn't do it.

 

 

Too bad there are no other pathways for us acquiring Salazar. I can't imagine any of our other relief arms being enough to even start a package. As good as Leone was last year, I doubt he even starts a conversation.

Posted

Jon Heyman of FanRag Sports (LOL still gets me) reports that the Blue Jays, Orioles, Giants and Mets are among the teams that have shown interest in Carlos Gonzalez.

 

The Rockies also haven't ruled out re-signing CarGo, although it doesn't appear that they view him as a priority at this point. Heyman notes that Gonzalez might be best off taking a one-year "pillow" contract in hopes of re-establishing his value following a disappointing showing in 2017. The 32-year-old batted .262/.339/.423 with 14 home runs and 57 RBI over 136 games for the Rockies last season.

Posted
I think they both have 3 years of control left right? It would really depend on what I thought of Salazar's medicals. Salazar carries a lot more risk, but could turn out to be better over those three years. The market for good relievers is pretty insane right now. For elite relievers it's pretty nuts. It's close but I probably wouldn't do it.

 

It's not a terrible trade on paper but if they have the same amount of control than it's just re-arranging the deck chairs in the hope that you can patch the bullpen more easily than the rotation. That makes it a bit underwhelming. And you're right that it doesn't feel like maximizing the return on Osuna. You would prefer a trade with potential benefits beyond the length of Osuna's current deal. That being said, I wouldn't entirely hate it. If for instance, the front office have reservations about Osuna going forward and think Salazar could turn the corner durability wise maybe it makes sense to shift their eggs to a different basket but they'd have to feel like they have a really good read on the future of both players to pull the trigger on something like this. It's not like the Jays front office is unfamiliar with Salazar. If they decided to place a bet on him, I would be cautiously optimistic about it but I think it's more likely that it doesn't happen.

Posted
It's not a terrible trade on paper but if they have the same amount of control than it's just re-arranging the deck chairs in the hope that you can patch the bullpen more easily than the rotation. That makes it a bit underwhelming. And you're right that it doesn't feel like maximizing the return on Osuna. You would prefer a trade with potential benefits beyond the length of Osuna's current deal. That being said, I wouldn't entirely hate it. If for instance, the front office have reservations about Osuna going forward and think Salazar could turn the corner durability wise maybe it makes sense to shift their eggs to a different basket but they'd have to feel like they have a really good read on the future of both players to pull the trigger on something like this. It's not like the Jays front office is unfamiliar with Salazar. If they decided to place a bet on him, I would be cautiously optimistic about it but I think it's more likely that it doesn't happen.

 

Durability issues would certainly be a potential problem, but you're also talking about someone who put up a 3.21 xFIP last year as a starter, has never put up over 3.74 in the big leagues, and has ace stuff. I'll take that over Osuna easily, with the same control. Salazar, Stroman, and Sanchez for the next 3 years also is pretty damn sexy if they stay healthy.

Posted
Durability issues would certainly be a potential problem, but you're also talking about someone who put up a 3.21 xFIP last year as a starter, has never put up over 3.74 in the big leagues, and has ace stuff. I'll take that over Osuna easily, with the same control. Salazar, Stroman, and Sanchez for the next 3 years also is pretty damn sexy if they stay healthy.

 

It's not just his inability to pitch deep into games and his inability to make 30 starts, he has serious injury red flags with both his elbow and shoulder. He's tantalizing but also very likely to completely break down at any time. It's also pretty gross to think about how abysmal our bullpen would be without our one good reliever. Osuna is the linchpin, behind him it's absolute s***. I'm sure Shatkins would be in on Salazar due to their history, but trading Osuna to get him doesn't seem like much of a net win.

Posted
It's not just his inability to pitch deep into games and his inability to make 30 starts, he has serious injury red flags with both his elbow and shoulder. He's tantalizing but also very likely to completely break down at any time. It's also pretty gross to think about how abysmal our bullpen would be without our one good reliever. Osuna is the linchpin, behind him it's absolute s***. I'm sure Shatkins would be in on Salazar due to their history, but trading Osuna to get him doesn't seem like much of a net win.

 

You don’t rate any of Biagini, Barnes or Ramirez?

Posted
You don’t rate any of Biagini, Barnes or Ramirez?

 

Leone was pretty damn good last year too. Feel like he's a real underrated part of the bullpen.

Posted
What kind of relief pitching help do we think they are looking for or in need of?

 

I'm sure they'd want an elite reliever with at least equal years of control if they're moving Salazar, probably only Osuna would cut it from our end.

Posted
I'm sure they'd want an elite reliever if they're moving Salazar, probably only Osuna would cut it from our end.

 

Thanks P, then I would say hell nooo

To that !!! Not sure but why does it seems so many would be eager to move him???

Posted
I'm sure they'd want an elite reliever with at least equal years of control if they're moving Salazar, probably only Osuna would cut it from our end.

 

Osuna is a perfect fit. Same years of control and good enough and established enough that they don't have to worry too much about what kind of upside Salazar himself would have as a reliever because they're getting a surer thing.

Community Moderator
Posted

I think Osuna's health stuff would scare them off.

 

Their wish list is probably guys like Felipe Rivero, Archie Bradley - a bit more control. And without so much Saves baggage for arbitration considerations.

Community Moderator
Posted
God damn Osuna is good though. His numbers from last year are eiubgrekgubhragkbrdsgrbeuhgbuegherugh **(splooges in pants at work)
Posted
Durability issues would certainly be a potential problem, but you're also talking about someone who put up a 3.21 xFIP last year as a starter, has never put up over 3.74 in the big leagues, and has ace stuff. I'll take that over Osuna easily, with the same control. Salazar, Stroman, and Sanchez for the next 3 years also is pretty damn sexy if they stay healthy.

 

Abom is in favour of getting Salazar. Let's not touch him with a 10 ft pole.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
The Jays Centre Caretaker Fund
The Jays Centre Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Blue Jays community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...