Early 22 GM Thread! (Trade Ideas here)

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Gson

Sixth Man
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
3,062
Reaction score
1,383
Points
113
There is no false urgency...there is immediate need. (If you truly want to contend for a division title. If not, just say so.)

We need two corner OFs...unless you are happy with what you watched this year. Or, unless you think that one of Jones, Palacios, or Ka'ai...er...Steven Kwan will step in and immediately provide 2.5 WAR.

We need a catcher. We only have one MLB right now. Presumably, you'd like something other than a 39 yr old career backup.

We don't have $30-40 mil to sign those three positions, so the only way to acquire three significant upgrades is to trade some of our significant prospects.

So its gonna take some of Espino, Valera, Rocchio, Freeman, Arias, and Jones....or it will mean stripping our rotation.

Thats the cost of contention....like it or not.

Of those six, not one can be reasonably expected to contribute next year....by contributing, I mean provide at least 2 WAR. Without a trade, not one can be reasonably be expected to even open the season in Cleveland.

When you have 14 kids who have at least one valid reason to be added to the 40 man, and probably eight more next year...when you have sixteen MIFs rated as at least 40 FV...when you dont have room to fit all of your SP prospects into a rotation above A ball...it is not emasculating the farm system by trading a bunch of them. It's called pruning.
disagree with all of this drivel..

There is no presumption..

How much $$$ we have is unknown.. even if there is a falsely defined budget of some number..

It's not going to take _________ (six names) because it isn't happening..

14 kids... for ten spots.. the best ten stay.. the remaining 4 get exposed & drafted or returned to the system as minor leaguers or elect free agency, if qualified... you don't throw away the top four plus for one good guy to save the four on the bottom even if you have "prospect capital"..

Nothing is more wasteful and defeatist than being included into a dump of four or six guys who worked their asses off in a minor league system to be told the parent club doesn't believe in you.. These are guys from the top of a top 5 minor league system. For one guy, there are better deals..

.. and no plus 30 year old free agents on eight figure contracts..
 

CDAV45

Dingers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
3,119
Reaction score
1,773
Points
113
Think of how many people out there who want a Harley Davidson more than anything and end up with a Kawasaki.. That kind of sounds like the Guardians..
Even large market teams have prospects they protect and let me be clear, Pittsburgh has every right to ask for the moon in return for Reynolds. They'd be foolish not to. Having said that, your analogy is accurate. A couple of questions come to mind. First, did they ultimately get what they wanted from the Kawasaki? Second, with the savings will they be able to buy a better bike than the Harley they originally wanted?
 

CDAV45

Dingers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
3,119
Reaction score
1,773
Points
113
disagree with all of this drivel..

There is no presumption..

How much $$$ we have is unknown.. even if there is a falsely defined budget of some number..

It's not going to take _________ (six names) because it isn't happening..

14 kids... for ten spots.. the best ten stay.. the remaining 4 get exposed & drafted or returned to the system as minor leaguers or elect free agency, if qualified... you don't throw away the top four plus for one good guy to save the four on the bottom even if you have "prospect capital"..

Nothing is more wasteful and defeatist than being included into a dump of four or six guys who worked their asses off in a minor league system to be told the parent club doesn't believe in you.. These are guys from the top of a top 5 minor league system. For one guy, there are better deals..

.. and no plus 30 year old free agents on eight figure contracts..
Easy Gson, I wouldn't call CATS opinion "drivel". He makes valid points even if you don't agree. To be honest, I might be on the fence with it because outside of Espino and Valera I don't know what the rest would entail.

I don't think being desired by a team trading one of the best players in the game is "defeatist". I'd consider it an honor even if I didn't like the change. I do agree with you that there are probably better deals for 1 guy.
 

Criznit

Sixth Man
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
2,837
Reaction score
1,747
Points
113
Even large market teams have prospects they protect and let me be clear, Pittsburgh has every right to ask for the moon in return for Reynolds. They'd be foolish not to. Having said that, your analogy is accurate. A couple of questions come to mind. First, did they ultimately get what they wanted from the Kawasaki? Second, with the savings will they be able to buy a better bike than the Harley they originally wanted?

I'm fooling a bit. Some want the bike, some want the culture..

But back to baseball.

I am good with splurging on Reynolds, but I am also good with protecting our top prospects.. Not a lot of wrong answers for me this off-season, unless our acquisitions (which there certainly will be) are very underwhelming.... Don't want to be thinking, well it kinda looks like a Harley, I guess....
 

CDAV45

Dingers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
3,119
Reaction score
1,773
Points
113
Going out on a limb and say let's just trade for Merrifield and sign Suzuki... Lead off guy and 5/6 hole guy... sign Gomes, get a veteran relief guy. Trade for Bowden of the Rockies... off season done lol
You're out on that limb without me brother! I think we've already seen the best of Witt and I want nothing to do with Suzuki unless he comes much cheaper than expected. I don't think we need Bowden either. I'm ready to roll with Gose and Hentges. A LHRP could be targeted at anytime during the season and Bowden would be a good one if needed.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think signing Gomes is going to be as easy as many here think for reasons I've already stated. Love to have him though.

I think Happ is a likely target and it wouldn't surprise me if Cherny got aggressive with an offer to bring Contreras along as well. We'll see.
 

CDAV45

Dingers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
3,119
Reaction score
1,773
Points
113
I'm fooling a bit. Some want the bike, some want the culture..

But back to baseball.

I am good with splurging on Reynolds, but I am also good with protecting our top prospects.. Not a lot of wrong answers for me this off-season, unless our acquisitions (which there certainly will be) are very underwhelming.... Don't want to be thinking, well it kinda looks like a Harley, I guess....
Well said my friend and precisely how I see it as well.
 

CDAV45

Dingers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
3,119
Reaction score
1,773
Points
113
I should explain why I'm reluctant to trade Espino, or any good SP prospect really. I wouldn't look to extend Bieber. The cost and length of that contract would just be too much IMO. He very well may get ridiculously expensive in arbitration. In fact, if he doesn't then something went terribly wrong. We've been so good at developing/trading for pitching that I'd rather trade Bieber when he's close to FA or gets too expensive. That's not a concern right now and I'm not advocating trading him at all. I'm against it for at least 2 yrs unless some of these prospects or current rotation members can show that they can be an ace. Just wanted to clarify.
 

Gson

Sixth Man
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
3,062
Reaction score
1,383
Points
113
Easy Gson, I wouldn't call CATS opinion "drivel". He makes valid points even if you don't agree. To be honest, I might be on the fence with it because outside of Espino and Valera I don't know what the rest would entail.

I don't think being desired by a team trading one of the best players in the game is "defeatist". I'd consider it an honor even if I didn't like the change. I do agree with you that there are probably better deals for 1 guy.
You may be right.. I apologize..
 

Gson

Sixth Man
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
3,062
Reaction score
1,383
Points
113
I should explain why I'm reluctant to trade Espino, or any good SP prospect really. I wouldn't look to extend Bieber. The cost and length of that contract would just be too much IMO. He very well may get ridiculously expensive in arbitration. In fact, if he doesn't then something went terribly wrong. We've been so good at developing/trading for pitching that I'd rather trade Bieber when he's close to FA or gets too expensive. That's not a concern right now and I'm not advocating trading him at all. I'm against it for at least 2 yrs unless some of these prospects or current rotation members can show that they can be an ace. Just wanted to clarify.
When pitchers are used the way the Guardians have used them.. extending them is inherently risky.. To keep the quality of pitching up there (assumes our SP staff is and will remain a strength of the team).. a continuous quantity of quality arms need to be in the development pipeline.. The guy at the top of that list right now.. is Espino.. Hankins.. Williams.. Vargas.. Morris.. Allen.. Torres... Curry.. and others..
 

sportscoach

Snarly's Gaming Rival!!
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
9,356
Reaction score
3,952
Points
113
You're out on that limb without me brother! I think we've already seen the best of Witt and I want nothing to do with Suzuki unless he comes much cheaper than expected. I don't think we need Bowden either. I'm ready to roll with Gose and Hentges. A LHRP could be targeted at anytime during the season and Bowden would be a good one if needed.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think signing Gomes is going to be as easy as many here think for reasons I've already stated. Love to have him though.

I think Happ is a likely target and it wouldn't surprise me if Cherny got aggressive with an offer to bring Contreras along as well. We'll see.

I still say Dolan make it happen! Lol

Whit lead the league in 2Bs and SBs in 21... Him and Straw as our 1-2 would be hell for pitchers... lol
 

CDAV45

Dingers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
3,119
Reaction score
1,773
Points
113
I still say Dolan make it happen! Lol

Whit lead the league in 2Bs and SBs in 21... Him and Straw as our 1-2 would be hell for pitchers... lol
I don't think we need more SBs as we were in the top 5(3rd I believe) in that category anyway.

You go ahead and worry about a 2 hole hitter. My concerns lay in more needed areas.
 

CDAV45

Dingers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
3,119
Reaction score
1,773
Points
113
When pitchers are used the way the Guardians have used them.. extending them is inherently risky.. To keep the quality of pitching up there (assumes our SP staff is and will remain a strength of the team).. a continuous quantity of quality arms need to be in the development pipeline.. The guy at the top of that list right now.. is Espino.. Hankins.. Williams.. Vargas.. Morris.. Allen.. Torres... Curry.. and others..
I agree with this. I'd add Battenfield and Pilkington towards the top of that list. They're most likely not TOR SP Gson, but they are work horse types that should be solid MOR SP when all is said and done. I think Battenfield's ceiling is ever so slightly higher because he limits walks a bit better than Pilkington right now. I'm really looking forward to seeing some Clippers' games if I can find the time between watching my kid play college ball and my work.

Shane Bieber is our undisputed ace and pitchers like him don't grow on trees. I have no delusions that Battenfield, Pilkington, or Allen are Shane Bieber reincarnate, but for S&G's let's look at some numbers:
At the age of 23 Bieber pitched for Akron and Columbus. He gave up 6.3 H9, .8 BB9(unheard of) with 8.7 SO9.
Battenfield at the age of 23 pitched in AA and gave up 5.8 H9, 1.7 BB9(very good) with 11.4 SO9.
Pilkington at the age of 23 pitched in AA and gave up 5.5 H9, 3.5 BB9(needs to improve) with 10.7 SO9.
LT Allen at the age of 22 pitched in A+ and AA and gave up 6.2 H9, 2.1 BB9 with 11.6 SO9.
Curry at the age of 22 pitched across 3 levels which ended in AA and he gave up 6.5 H9, 1.5 BB9(very good), with 10.4 SO9.

Again, I'm not trying to say these guys are Shane Biebers waiting to happen. I'm just pointing out that there is a trend and these guys are nothing to be scoffed at IMO. You can probably add Burns and Nikhazy to that list as well.

All Morris did once sent to Columbus is give up 6.0 H9, 3.0 BB9(like to see it reduced) with a silly 13.7 SO9. I think this dude is for real.

All of Espino, Torres, Vargas, Hankins, and Williams have huge arms and upsides, but are further away than those I listed above. Espino had an amazing 14.9 SO9, but carried a 3.8 BB9 as well. He's only 20 and I don't know if that 3.8 BB9 is even much of a concern when you SO damn near 15 batters per 9IP.

Sorry, got off on a tirade.........again.
 
Last edited:

CATS44

NBA Starter
Joined
Feb 25, 2020
Messages
6,173
Reaction score
4,565
Points
113
I'm not fixated on Reynolds. He's just an example.

I've pretty much listed my trade shopping list, which includes Reynolds, Mullins, Laureano, Edman, Happ, Yaz, among others.

************

It was drivel when I wanted a slap hitting AA kid named Brantley. It was drivel when I wanted a doubles machine, but no homers, OF named Choo. It was drivel when I insisted that I wouldn't trade Bauer to the Padres, unless we got a two month wonder named Reyes + a highly ranked LH SP.

It was drivel when I said that a Tribe trade target should be Amed. It was drivel when I said that Shaw would make the team and be solid. It was drivel when I said that a second trade with SD should include Quantrill.

I dont mind that my GM plans are framed as drivel.

But what I posted that WAS drivel was when I insisted...loudly....that the Tribe shouldn't trade its best prospect and its fifth best prospect and two more pitchers (three total) for 2.5 yrs of a reliever, no matter how good that reliever might be.

My goodness, the system would be emasculated! We will sell the future down the river. A franchise like Cleveland can't survive if it trades its best prospects. All for what? A freaking reliever!

Not only that, the FO tried to trade FOUR MORE prospects for 1.5 yrs of Lucroy. A total of eight prospects.

In all, at the time of the trade, the prospects we were willing to trade were ranked about 1-4-5-10-20-24-30-lottery

THAT was drivel. Sound like anybody in this thread?

BTW, of the top five prospects at the beginning of 2016, not one yet has done jack squat in the last FIVE years. TMac and Sheffield may turn into something. One isn't even in baseball. Of the eight we were willing to trade, Sheffield and Mejia may turn into something, but haven't yet.

No rational person is crying over the loss of any of them.

THAT is what we are talking about when we discuss our best prospects....not a collection of sure fire MVP and CY players.
 

CDAV45

Dingers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
3,119
Reaction score
1,773
Points
113
I'm not fixated on Reynolds. He's just an example.

I've pretty much listed my trade shopping list, which includes Reynolds, Mullins, Laureano, Edman, Happ, Yaz, among others.

************

It was drivel when I wanted a slap hitting AA kid named Brantley. It was drivel when I wanted a doubles machine, but no homers, OF named Choo. It was drivel when I insisted that I wouldn't trade Bauer to the Padres, unless we got a two month wonder named Reyes + a highly ranked LH SP.

It was drivel when I said that a Tribe trade target should be Amed. It was drivel when I said that Shaw would make the team and be solid. It was drivel when I said that a second trade with SD should include Quantrill.

I dont mind that my GM plans are framed as drivel.

But what I posted that WAS drivel was when I insisted...loudly....that the Tribe shouldn't trade its best prospect and its fifth best prospect and two more pitchers (three total) for 2.5 yrs of a reliever, no matter how good that reliever might be.

My goodness, the system would be emasculated! We will sell the future down the river. A franchise like Cleveland can't survive if it trades its best prospects. All for what? A freaking reliever!

Not only that, the FO tried to trade FOUR MORE prospects for 1.5 yrs of Lucroy. A total of eight prospects.

In all, at the time of the trade, the prospects we were willing to trade were ranked about 1-4-5-10-20-24-30-lottery

THAT was drivel. Sound like anybody in this thread?

BTW, of the top five prospects at the beginning of 2016, not one yet has done jack squat in the last FIVE years. TMac and Sheffield may turn into something. One isn't even in baseball. Of the eight we were willing to trade, Sheffield and Mejia may turn into something, but haven't yet.

No rational person is crying over the loss of any of them.

THAT is what we are talking about when we discuss our best prospects....not a collection of sure fire MVP and CY players.
I understand what you're saying CATS, but to be fair the farm system hasn't been this good since the early 90's so I don't think we're comparing apples to apples here. Please don't mistake that for the idea that I wouldn't trade any prospects to improve the MLB team because I absolutely would. I guess I just have my limits on how much I'm willing to spend.

I don't recall anyone bemoaning the choosing of Brantley. He was the PTBNL in the CC deal. He was a good hitter, but to claim you knew what he was going to be from the get go is...well...BS.

In hindsight, we didn't give up much to get Miller other than Frazier and that kinda hurts right now even though it was worth it at the time. The point being, he was clearly the best prospect in that deal and where do you think he would rank in this system now?

The Brewers were willing to take Mejia, Chang, Allen, and Armstrong for LuCroy. What Cleveland fan wouldn't make that deal?

In the end, nobody would cry over the loss of one of our top prospects, but when/if they're asking for 3-4 of them then it's time to end the conversation IMO. My point is simply that the asking price is too high for Reynolds and we should shop elsewhere. You're list is good and we could start there.
 

Criznit

Sixth Man
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
2,837
Reaction score
1,747
Points
113
I understand what you're saying CATS, but to be fair the farm system hasn't been this good since the early 90's so I don't think we're comparing apples to apples here. Please don't mistake that for the idea that I wouldn't trade any prospects to improve the MLB team because I absolutely would. I guess I just have my limits on how much I'm willing to spend.

I don't recall anyone bemoaning the choosing of Brantley. He was the PTBNL in the CC deal. He was a good hitter, but to claim you knew what he was going to be from the get go is...well...BS.

In hindsight, we didn't give up much to get Miller other than Frazier and that kinda hurts right now even though it was worth it at the time. The point being, he was clearly the best prospect in that deal and where do you think he would rank in this system now?

The Brewers were willing to take Mejia, Chang, Allen, and Armstrong for LuCroy. What Cleveland fan wouldn't make that deal?

In the end, nobody would cry over the loss of one of our top prospects, but when/if they're asking for 3-4 of them then it's time to end the conversation IMO. My point is simply that the asking price is too high for Reynolds and we should shop elsewhere. You're list is good and we could start there.
I get the steep price, but it is for a player with 4 controllable years remaining and he will make minimum wage in 2022.. That's as good as it gets for a perpetually cash strapped team like us.

Also you are hoping/expecting that Reynolds is an All-Star/MVP candidate/etc. in each of those 4 years.. One top prospect a year sounds about right. Also if it comes to it, we trade Reynolds when the time is right and recoup some of our prospect loss.

Again though, I can go either way on this one as long as they make a substantial move or 3 this off-season.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast

The Rubber Rim Job Episode 1:2 "A Celtic Chasedown"
Top