What Greinke or Hamels Would Yield in a Trade

With the Milwaukee Brewers and Philadelphia Phillies 6.0 and 10.0 games out, respectively, of the second wild-card spot in the National League, it’s probable that one or both teams will trade their front-line, free-agent-to-be starters — i.e. Zack Greinke and Cole Hamels — before the July 31st trade deadline.

“What might either be worth in terms of trade value?” is a question that a reasonable person might ask — perhaps has asked as recently as the first paragraph of this post. Ultimately, the market will dictate the answer to that question. In the meantime, however, we can consider what comparable pitchers have fetched in terms of return packages in the not-very-distant past.

Below are (arguably) the most high-profile starting pitchers to have been traded at or near the deadline over each of the last four seasons. For each pitcher, I’ve included the prospects received in exchange for him. I’ve also included the grades given to those prospects by very respected American gentleman John Sickels in his preseason rankings (which appear at SB Nation’s Minor League Ball).

Note: under the new CBA, it’s the case that, while Milwaukee and Philadelphia would receive compensatory picks in the 2013 draft for losing Greinke and Hamels, respectively, it’s also the case that a team, receiving either of those pitchers in a trade, would not be granted those compensatory picks. That provision might, ultimately, affect the trade value of Greinke and Hamels.

2011

Colorado Gives Up
Ubaldo Jimenez, RHP

Cleveland Gives Up
Drew Pomeranz, LHP, B+
Alex White, RHP, B+
Joe Gardner, RHP, B
Matt Mcbride, OF, N/A

Notes
At the time of this trade, Jimenez had failed to match his per-inning numbers from previous seasons. While that might have affected his value negatively, it’s also notable that Jiminez was (and still is) signed through 2014, at a relatively affordable $17.95 million.

2010

Seattle Gives Up
Cliff Lee, LHP
Mark Lowe, RHP
$2.25 Million

Texas Gives Up
Justin Smoak, 1B, A-
Blake Beavan, RHP, C+
Matt Lawson, 2B, N/A
Josh Lueke, RHP, N/A

Notes
Cliff Lee was excellent with Seattle over the first half of the season, posting a 72 xFIP- and 3.9 WAR through 103.2 innings. Justin Smoak had a terrific, if brief, run at Triple-A, slashing .300/.470/.540 in 66 plate appearances, before getting promoted to the majors. Whether that bumped him up to a straight A isn’t something that I know, although Smoak certainly would have been a strong A- at the time of the trade.

2009

Cleveland Gives Up
Cliff Lee, LHP
Ben Francisco, OF

Philadelphia Gives Up
Carlos Carrasco, RHP, B
Jason Donald, SS, B-
Jason Knapp, RHP, B-
Lou Marson, C , C

Notes
Of note: Cliff Lee arrived in Philadelphia signed through 2010 for $8 million — likely a bargain, even when considering 2009′s dollar-per-win value. (In fact, Philadelphia would proceed to trade Lee to Seattle in the offseason.)

2008

Cleveland Give Up
CC Sabathia, LHP

Milwaukee Gives Up
Matt LaPorta, 1B/3B, B+
Michael Brantley, OF, C+
Rob Bryson, RHP, C+
Zach Jackson, LHP, C

Notes
LaPorta was hitting a robust .288/.402/.576 (.300 BABIP) through 366 plate appearances at Double-A Huntsville at the time of this trade, which suggests that he might’ve been more an A- than B+ by the time it occurred.

Concluding Conclusions

Quantity and Quality: A Consideration
Inspecting the four deals above, it appears as though, of late, top-end starters have been more likely to yield a number (in fact, four exactly, every time) of B and C-type prospects — as opposed to just one or two high-end type. Indeed, the Jimenez deal — with two B+ prospects, in Pomeranz and White — appears to have been the biggest return of those considered here.

For Reference: A vs. B vs. C
For reference, Sickels’ prospect ratings produced 10 total A prospects and 13 more A- prospects — for a total of 23 prospects in the A-ish range. Among prospects in the B range, there were 133 each of pitchers and hitters. Just under 300 prospects received a C+ grade.

For Reference: Texas Rangers Prospects
Texas third-base prospect Mike Olt (currently hitting .294/.404/.578 with a .344 BABIP in 344 PA at Double-A Frisco) is a name frequently invoked in discussions of potential trade-deadline deals. Sickels gave Olt a B rating this past offseason — although Olt has probably climbed up to B+ territory, given his place on Sickels’ midseason top-120 prospect list. In either case, the inclusion of an Olt-level prospect is consistent with what we’ve seen from previous trade packages for other elite starters at the trade deadline.




Print This Post



Carson Cistulli occasionally publishes spirited ejaculations at The New Enthusiast.

91 Responses to “What Greinke or Hamels Would Yield in a Trade”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
  1. Greg says:

    While we don’t know how the guys the Rockies got will work out, looking at the other trades it’s fair to say one thing is consistent – NONE of the young guys worked out.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Indeed, it does appear as most of these trades have been fruitless, in terms of payoff from prospects. Michael Brantley (1.2 WAR in 347 PA this year) actually appears to be the most useful of all the prospects mentioned.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • MikeS says:

      Yeah. Under the old rules they all would have been no worse off holding onto the guy and getting a draft pick when he left as a free agent.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • maguro says:

        Under the new rules, the current team can still get a draft pick. It’s just the teams that trade for guys mid-season that aren’t eligible to receive draft compensation.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  2. Makudestiny says:

    I’m surprised the original Greinke trade wasn’t included in here. Seems like a fairly appropriate gauge for value considering outside of 2 years of age, not too much has changed.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  3. RMD says:

    Hopefully we’ll see trades similar to the Beltran trade as opposed to the aforementioned deals (and the Grienke deal) which are quantity over quality.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  4. nik says:

    Also you should add that Seattle could have had a straight A prospect in Motero along with some others but chose to go with Smoak instead.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Mr. Wisdom I am Not says:

      Smoak and Montero were similarily ranked prospects at the time of the trade.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • nolan says:

      When and where was it confirmed that Montero was available for Cliff Lee?

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • nik says:

        It has never been disputed by anyone involved.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • placidity says:

        Well if it’s never been disputed, it must be true. But if it were disputed by someone, they’re probably just lying and it’s still true.

        Same as every PED accusation ever.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Colin says:

      Love the ad hoc analysis. Smoak and Montero were similarly ranked at the time. Frankly considering the production of both, I’m not sure even with the benefit of hindsight that you made a good point.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Chris R says:

        you mean post hoc?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Colin says:

        Hmm. My understanding is that it also applies to situations where somebody uses theory to fit already known. So I think it still applies here but you are right post hoc is better.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • LTG says:

        ‘post hoc’ is short for ‘post hoc, propter hoc’: ‘after this, so because of this’, a mistaken inference about what causes what (even if it is right).

        ‘ad hoc’: ‘for this purpose’ or ‘towards this’, an attempt to claim ‘I intended that the whole time’ or ‘those events were inevitably leading to this one’, a suspicious way of extending a previous account to fit otherwise falsifying facts. (Strangely, this one is used to refer to arguments that tack on criteria to cover counter-examples without independently justifying the new criteria.)

        So, yes, they are quite similar. But if we want to be arbitrarily precise we could say that ‘post hoc’ refers to mistakes in reasoning about efficient causes while ‘ad hoc’ refers to mistakes in reasoning about final causes.

        Anyway, I doubt either applies to nik’s comment. Either Montero was available and similarly regarded to Smoak or he wasn’t. Those are just matters of fact. If true, then nik’s point adds to the historical context in which we can understand the deal. If false, then it doesn’t. I don’t see any fallacies in argumentative form here. We are all vulnerable to believing false things about the world.

        +7 Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Derek says:

        Nerds!

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  5. Paul says:

    I’ll just note that I think Sickels had some of those guys rated higher than he was, and the assumptions about Smoak and LaPorta getting bumped up to A level prospects based on a few AAA at bats is not sound. Remember, the Rangers FO was split on who was the better guy prior to that season: Smoak or Moreland. And nobody, and I mean nobody on the planet has ever thought LaPorta could play 3B at the MLB Level. Plus, he meekly waved at average fastballs in the Futures Game that season, Cleveland was smart to shed him quickly while somebody still believed in him.

    All of that of course supports Carson’s conclusion that most of these deadline deals, while not even overwhelming at the time, shows just how little a playoff caliber team needs to give up to try and pick up those crucial few extra games. It really will be fascinating to watch how the draft pick compensation issue plays out, especially since Milwaukee and Philly will have an increased bonus pool if they just keep them. Also, don’t forget the extra “play-in” team. In a rational world, all this should mean that the haul for these two guys will be the legit top prospects, who as noted have not been included in recent deals.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  6. Taylor06 says:

    The new CBA will definitely affect what these teams get back if they do choose to trade either guy.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • nik says:

      Its still a matter of supply and demand. Teams will not let go of their elite talent for poor returns. They can always just get 2 comp picks if they walk away.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • GoToWarMissAgnes says:

        No they can’t; that’s Taylor’s whole point. No more comp picks in the new CBA. That will (or should) lessen the value of what teams are willing to give up.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • nik says:

        You didn’t get my point. The selling team can just hold on to the player and let him walk as a FA and get 2 valuable comp picks. The buyers will still have to make it worthwhile.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Paul says:

        But the flip side is that comp picks are worth a lot more now because there will be fewer of them. And the bonus pool increases. A savvy team can really use that to their advantage, especially if they are willing to pay the tax for going over their total bonus pool by a bit.

        And then there’s the extra playoff slot. The changes to the compensation system combined with the extra playoff slot, and the history of prospects not panning out as Carson has just shown, should make more teams buyers. A playoff appearance generates cash money, and that’s what owners care about the most.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Paul says:

        The originating team has more incentive now to just hold onto pending free agents, that is…

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • BX says:

        One could argue that an elite impending FA has more value at this trade deadline than he did last year.

        1) The seller isn’t under any increased pressure to trade their assets, as they can still get the 2 comp picks for an elite player. And there are fewer comp picks so the picks may be worth more.

        2) There are more buyers because there are two more playoff spots. In other words, more demand. Conversely, there are more contenders so there are fewer sellers. Less supply, more demand.

        3) One could argue that this is especially true for wildcards and ace starting pitchers, since an ace starter is a significant single-game improvement in your single-game wildcard playoff.

        The CBA rules will affect significantly the second-tier deadline trade market (think middle relievers, middle/back of rotation starters, etc.) where the seller CAN’T get comp picks and the player in question ISN’T a game-changing improvement.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • payroll says:

        The team still has to make a qualifying offer to get the comp picks.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • payroll says:

        There is also the fact that, if traded, neither Greinke nor Hamels could yield comp picks to their new teams at the end of the year

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  7. Slats says:

    Smoak is now a F.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  8. bliss says:

    A bit off-topic, but I’ve pondered a trade of Felix Hernandez to Boston for Matt Barnes*, Xander Bogaerts, Jackie Bradley* and Garin Cecchini after Baseball America ranked Barnes, Bogaerts and Bradley No. 13, No. 31 and No. 32 in its midseason prospect rankings.

    Each side would have reservations about that deal.

    The current much-maligned Seattle lineup includes four hitters whom Baseball America ranked on its midseason Top 25 prospect lists in the three previous seasons: Justin Smoak at No. 4 in 2009, Michael Saunders at No. 25 in 2009, Dustin Ackley at No. 7 in 2010 and Jesus Montero at No. 3 in 2009, No. 5 in 2010 and No. 8 in 2011.

    The midseason rankings of Barnes, Bogaerts and Bradley pale in comparison. My point is that nothing is guaranteed.

    * Barnes and Bradley, who were drafted in 2011, would need to be players to be named

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Colin says:

      Boston always has a stable of players ranked in that range, frankly I wonder how much other teams discount for that at this point. Not to mention I doubt most other prospect people follow BA’s rankings vs just having their own scouts give their opinions.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • NS says:

        Boston’s prospects are overhyped and never pan out.

        - The Astros & Athletics

        +9 Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Ross says:

        Teams don’t use “Rankings” as a gauge of who to trade for or consider trading for. Do they look at those? Sure, but they take it with a grain of salt and rely on the scouts they pay(!!) to tell them what prospects to target in trades. Baseball America may rank Team X’s prospect one way, but Team X has their own feelings about their own prospects and how highly they think of them. I don’t think teams rank their own, or other teams prospects, the rankings are more or less for us the readers. Team have their scouting reports and bunch their prospects into tiers, I believe.*

        *I’ve been wrong before.. just ask my wife.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Travolta19 says:

      Barnes and Bradley would not need to be names later, since the date has passed.

      There is no way Boston would do that deal, at least of their own free will. 2 of the first 3 would be the most I’d think, with maybe a minor 3rd/4th piece at tops.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Patrick says:

      This is exactly the type of trade the Red Sox desparately need to avoid for two reasons:

      (1) Theo Epstein left them with a terrible payroll situation. While we don’t really know what the Red Sox revenue streams look like, if we compare the Red Sox payroll and market to that of other similar teams, it is seems unlikely that they can really afford to take on a lot more payroll. What they really need to do is find more low-cost alternatives (like the ones they “gave away” to Houston and Oakland) to give them better depth, flexibility and perhaps even athleticism.

      (2) While it has become chic to say that Red Sox prospects are over-rated, if you actually take the time to look up the numbers like I did(specifically WAR produced by players they originally signed and the actual BA top 100 lists) you would find that Red Sox prospects are perenially underrated within the industry — very underrated. As a result, the Red Sox in general pay a higher price in prospects than other teams.

      Finally, I don’t think Red Sox prospects are underrated due to bias against the Red Sox; more it’s a matter that first impressions count for a lot. Most blue-chip prospects become blue-chip prospects before they ever sign a contract. As a late drafting team — the Red Sox haven’t had a top five pick in 45 years and only one top ten pick during that time — they don’t end up with many of these players and thus don’t end up doing very well on the BA lists.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • VivaAyala says:

      Felix is ours and you can’t have him.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  9. everdiso says:

    To TOR: C.Hamels
    To PHI: CF A.Gose B+, LH J.Nicolino B+, RH D.McGuire B+, C A.Jimenez B-

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • nik says:

      Phils would take that

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • everdiso says:

      yeah, probably too much now that I think about, especially considering what younger more controllable pitchers went for in the offseason.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Anon21 says:

      I guarantee you, your beloved AA knows this team isn’t making the playoffs, even if you don’t.

      +10 Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Brian says:

      Giving up so much just to have a *CHANCE* at grabbing the Wild Card spot. The only time I would go after a guy like Cole is if my team is fighting for the division title.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  10. Greg Iversen says:

    LAA: Hamels/Greinke rental

    PHI/MIL: Peter Bourjos

    One of the best defensive outfielders in the game for a team that likely is going to trade Victorino and for a team who would has Carlos Gomez/Nyjer Morgan in the middle.

    Like you said, a proven player or a bunch of prospects?

    -6 Vote -1 Vote +1

    • YanksFanInBeantown says:

      Yeah, cause the Phillies and Brewers would definitely want a below-average hitting 4th outfielder in return for a proven ace.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Pat Golden says:

        just keep proving that yankees fans dont understand baseball. Bourgos put up what, 5 WAR last season? His a defensive wiz and that has value in CF. On the flip side, Grienke and Hamels have little to no value on a team that isn’t contending, and 2-3 months for 3-4 years of bourgos is absolutely worth it.

        Really a great suggestion

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Colin says:

        Bourjos is pretty valuable. That said, I also feel pretty confident he’s probably not a 5 WAR player true talent level.

        +15 Vote -1 Vote +1

      • ......... says:

        I agree on the Brewers side, they already have 2 of those almost exact players in Gomez and Morgan. Why get another defensive center fielder who doesn’t hit well and has already started using up his most valuable(least $) years. Would make no sense.

        +5 Vote -1 Vote +1

      • YanksFanInBeantown says:

        Not to be too Yankee-centric but Bourjos is Gardner-lite. Equal fielding, slightly more power but less speed, less walks and more strikeouts.

        And again, being a defensive whiz is a great attribute for a 4th outfielder, but starters need to be able to hit as well. Just ask the Mariners.

        And Pat, his WAR was closer to 4 last season when he scraped the limits of his offensive ceiling.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • pounded clown says:

      Brown had been playing CF before suffering a minor hammy injury and was progressing fielding wise. Still not even close a CF of Bourjos fielding talent however. I was intrigued by Bourjos but not enough to suppress the urge I would have to make Ruben Amaro Jr. eat Hunter Pence if that deal were to go down.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Dunston says:

      For the life of me, I will never quite understand the infatuation with Peter Bourjos among these parts. Before this year, he was considered far more valuable than David Wright, and despite his considerable struggles at the plate this year, people still seem to be high on him (picked for the All-Star game here by Cameron this year). He’s 25 and has a career wOBA of .313 in 890 PA. Outside of his amazing defense, I’m not sure how much of a sure thing he really is.

      +10 Vote -1 Vote +1

      • George says:

        Not to obsess over threshold-type numbers, but his OBP over those 890 PA is in danger of slipping below .300 (.301 currently, only .291 over 145 PA this year), which never looks good.

        In any case, these types of trades, i.e. a high-profile rental for a moderately-proven, current pro, seem to be uncommon. Given a player’s imminent free agency, the trade haul can only be weighed against the value of the compensatory draft picks. A player with (2-3 years experience + an interesting, if imperfect skillset) might not have a first round draft pick’s ceiling, but he ought to be a safer bet, as well.

        Given the variance in draft pick success, what’s the expected value of a mid-first round pick (or whatever they’d get in compensation)? Has anyone done this type of thing using war as an output? I get the feeling the picks are treated as future all stars when they can also wind up with 27 career PA in AAA limbo (i.e. much worse than Bourjos).

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • George says:

        Having said all that, I still agree with the guy right below me.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  11. BrewCrew28 says:

    Your dreaming if you think Bourjos is enough for either of those two. Remember its gotta be enough to make them say no to a 1st rd pick.

    +10 Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Brian says:

      Bourjos and one B prospect should be enough to grab Cole. And the Phillies should be extatic for that deal.

      1) Solves the Phillies problem with Victorino.

      Offensively, Bourjos just needs regular playing time and he should be comparable to Victorino. Defensively, Bourjos is amazing. Bourjos is cheap and under team control until 2016; you can’t say the same for Victorino.

      2) Bourjos and one B prospect might be better than two draft picks.

      In all seriouness, Bourjos is the only ‘sure thing’ available. Meanwhile two draft picks might turn out to be busts. And furthermore, Bourjos is available to play RIGHT NOW, whereas draft picks will take 3 – 4 years in the minors.

      Just keep in mind, Cole publically said he is always willing to come back to Philadelphia, even if he is traded midseason.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  12. Jared says:

    As a Phillies fan, I’d think best case scenario for Hamels would be Olt and Leonys. Would be happy with just Olt or even just Castellanos at this stage.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • nik says:

      Totally agree. Anything less and they might as well just keep him.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • ......... says:

      Castellanos is probably the better prospect at this point and the team giving him up definitely values him more. They don’t have a 3rd basemen in house already locked up for years(insert Miggy joke here).

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Ross says:

        Disagree, respectfully of course. Castellanos has a great stick and is rising up the charts, but Olt has to be considered among the top 3B prospects, if not the best. He has a plus glove and has improved his approach at the plate this year. He will be a high K guy, but if he can continue to take pitches and work himself into favorable counts as well as take walks he will be a very valuable hitter. The Rangers value him very highly because of this, and just because they have an elite first baseman for at least 33.5 more years doesn’t mean Olt won’t contribute. They have worked him at first and the outfield corners, so if his bat continues to develop as expected he could be Beltre’s backup, spot start in the outfield on occasion, get a majority of his PT at first and be a big contributor to a playoff caliber team at a low cost for years to come.

        That said, as a Rangers fan, I’d trade him straight up for 3 months (most importantly the month of October) in a heartbeat. I’d miss him like hell the next 6+ years, but if Hamels led to one more strike than last October he’d be worth it.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Ted Nelson says:

        A little bias there Ross? Castellanos is regarded as the better prospect.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  13. nscheer says:

    what about the cubs (dembster or garza)? does the fact that they’ll eat 90% of the contract mean they could actually get an B+ or A prospect (e.g. castellanos)?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  14. Michael Scarn says:

    Greinke for Bogaerts would be good for both sides.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • BX says:

      Wow. A logical trade proposal on Fangraphs.

      The Sox would probably have to throw in 1-2 low level prospects/A ball lottery ticket types, but Greinke for Bogaerts would be excellent for both sides IMO.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Ari Collins says:

        Don’t be mean to FG. Logical trade proposals are few and far between in any comment thread.

        I like that trade proposal. Throwing in Felix Doubront or Franklin Morales as well might make sense to both sides. Perhaps a couple of high-upside low minors guys as well.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • BX says:

        Not trying to be mean to FG at all.

        I assume the Sox wouldnt want to put Doubront or Morales in the trade since they help the MLB team now, so I’d think some low level prospects would be the case, as you said.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  15. JayTeam says:

    There seems to be a misconception that teams who lose a FA to whom they’ve given a qualifying offer receive 2 draft picks. They only get 1 pick after the 1st round. The team that signs the FA forfeits a pick, but the new CBA does not say anything about that forfeited pick being given to the players previous team.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Paul says:

      Right. Plus there are the 6 “competitive balance” picks awarded to losing/low revenue teams. The Brewers could fall into that category and receive another pick after round 1, along with having a top 10 pick due only to record. If they signed a top FA to replace Greinke, they’d only lose their second rounder because a team picking in the top 10 can’t lose their first rounder. So that would give them three first round picks and a few million in extra bonus pool money, in an environment where first round picks are worth a lot more and the cost certainty provided by hard slotting makes those picks worth exponentially more than in the past.

      Callis just wrote today about how the draft changes had the opposite effect of what many in the industry thought would happen regarding players being willing to sign. I think it could extend to free agency. Elite FAs are gold because the seller losing a pick (which means the buyer buys it even though they don’t acquire it), and the buyers will need to have at least one top 25 prospect in all of baseball to even have their call answered. On the other hand, it may be that guys who can help but who are not stars and there is no compensation involved can be had for cash.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • JayTeam says:

        In your scenario, if the Brewers finish in the bottom 10, but have at least one extra pick before their second round pick and sign a FA, it’s their highest pick outside the top 10 they have to forfeit.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Paul says:

        That makes sense. And of course since it appears to be completely discretionary, if they were to sign a compensation free agent one has to wonder whether or not they would still be awarded a “competitive balance” pick. But then if they can’t sign Greinke it’s probably unlikely they will be able to sign one of the other comp FAs anyway.

        But to some extent it still illustrates that a team that sees the increased value of draft picks now, especially in the cost certainty environment, will be able to hold those guys for a king’s ransom. Which is exactly how it should be. I will be grateful to never again hear a big market team’s fans ridicule small market teams for not being willing to just turn those guys loose for nothing.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  16. Undocorkscrew says:

    Would Mike Minor and one of Nick Ahmed/Tommy La Stella/Edward Salcedo be enough to net Greinke? I wouldn’t be upset to see them trade Teheran for the guy if they can get him to sign an extension, especially with the guy getting absolutely lit up down in AAA.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  17. JF45 says:

    “To TOR: C.Hamels
    To PHI: CF A.Gose B+, LH J.Nicolino B+, RH D.McGuire B+, C A.Jimenez B-”

    Are you trying to recreate that first Cliff Lee trade? Why not throw in three more JAGs.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  18. L.UZR says:

    Phillies rent Hamels for the remainder of the season and sign him as a FA for next.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  19. Kyle H says:

    I wonder if the Orioles have any B prospects to give in a trade to the Brewers. Machado and Bundy are both top 10 prospects they wont be going anywhere. I guess Schoop or Delmonico would be the start.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Ari Collins says:

      Orioles would be a tough trade partner if they won’t include Machado or Bundy. Very top-heavy farm system. Schoop is probably a B or even B- prospect.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • futant462 says:

      What about straight up for Machado. I think that’s tough to say who would win. Grienke is a proven commodity. Machado is still a (very big) hope and a prayer.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • jrogers says:

      In my Ottoneu league I traded Machado straight up for Pujols (basically a rental – too expensive to keep)…

      Not the same thing, but maybe it’s something resembling a comparison?

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  20. Jesus in Cleats says:

    Bal – Zach Greinke

    Mil – Brian Matusz, Jonathan Schoop, Parker Bridwell, Tyler Townsend

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  21. Ted Nelson says:

    Biggest trend to me is Cleveland getting ripped off. They probably got the lowest returns for their aces and gave up the most for Ubaldo. They sort of distort the market with their ineptitude seeing as they were involved in 3 of the 4 deals.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Bill says:

      Funny you mention them, didn’t they overpay for Bartolo Colon or some Montreal Expo back in the day? I seem to remember the expos/nationals got 2 or 3 all stars including phillips in that deal?

      Regardless, in season trades for prospects rarely work out, at least lately. I think Texas’ haul from ATL for Tex a few years ago stands out.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • y says:

        i’m exhausted, so bear with me…but the first paragraph is a joke, right?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • jrogers says:

        “in season trades for prospects rarely work out”

        Unless you’re trading with the Dodgers. Carlos Santana for Casey Blake? James McDonald for Octavio Dotel?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  22. Doug Melvin's Evil Twin says:

    Both players should yeild at least one big time prospect and a spare part. i dont mean a top 25 prospect since their surplus values arent very high. If the acquiring team could somehow do a contract extension as part of the deal maybe the Brewers or Phillies get a bit more in return.

    The last time Doug Melinv had to “sell” he moved Carlos Lee for two established vets in Kevin Mench and Francisco Cordero, so if he unloads Greinke, he will probably want an MLB ready player as part of the deal, seeing as how he dosnt know the meaning of the word “rebuild” nor does he believe in it.

    I wouldnt be surprised to see a Brain Matusz/Jonathan Schoop for Greinke deal. Flip side is holding him til seasons end and letting his less than able Scouting Director get two extra picks in the ’13 draft. Not likely. Of they could also bankrupt the franchise and sign him for 5 years $120 million. Both more likely probably than a trade.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  23. Beth says:

    The Expos got a 3-month rental player in Colon along with JD Drew’s little brother. The Indians received Brandon Phillips, Cliff Lee & Grady Sizemore back.

    To be fair though, the Expos were owned by MLB at the time and preparing under the shadow of being contracted (along with the Twins) until the collective bargaining agreement signed with the players association a few months after the trade prohibited the contraction through to the end of the contract in 2006.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  24. mcawesome says:

    It doesn’t make much sense for the Phils to trade Hamels. Unless they think they won’t be in the playoff hunt for the next few years (highly unlikely), it would be pretty dumb to trade arguably the team’s best pitcher. Instead, they really should be trying to lock Hamels up and trade Victorino and Pence. Victorino’s skills have eroded to the point where they’re moving him to 7th in the lineup, and Pence loves to help himself to neck-high fastballs. They need to get what they can for those two, call it a year, and look towards next year.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Oliver says:

      While I agree with keeping Hamels, flipping Vic strikes me as a bad idea right now. It’d be selling low, and Shane’s almost certainly not as bad as he’s playing right now.

      Flipping Pence, on the other hand, I am 100% down with.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  25. Legend of Wild Bill Hagy says:

    Bal – Zach Greinke

    Mil – Jake Arrieta, Brian Matusz, Jonathan Schoop, Clayton Schrader

    Milwaukee gets two (semi)MLB ready pitchers, solid prospect and a potential very good reliever. That fits Melvin’s scheme.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • jrogers says:

      This would be interesting. Really the question comes down to then, what does Milwaukee (or Philly) think about Matusz or Arrieta? Salvageable or lost causes?

      Vote -1 Vote +1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current day month ye@r *