Future Roster - Trade Needs

[Urban]

Sorry, I am a not for Andujar. Seen some of the Rumors of Lindor for Adujar and Torres and makes me want to puke a little. Andjuar was out most of last year with labrum tear. Yet, even year before, he had a monster July/August and then fell off in Sept/Oct and the few games last year and this year.... With playing little/no defense, where do we hide him with Reyes and Bradley? Also, Torres is an AS caliber 2nd but heard rumors about glove/concentration at SS. Plus, he fell of last Sept (.237 BA) and this year (.231 BA). Yes, Lindor hasn't performed great either but 5 hr vs 1 hr for Torres plus the gold glove.

Andujar slashed .284 / .324 / .516 in September 2018 with 4 HR in 102 plate appearances. Only hit .200/.333/.200 in the playoffs but a tiny 12 plate appearance sample. He definitely has not looked good in his limited action post-surgery and his defense is very bad. I completely get why people may be down on Andujar.

Torres' 2019 was a bit of a roller coaster of average to spectacular offensive production. He had a sub-par September yes, but then was the Yankees' best player in the posteason.

I think Torres + Andujar would be a pretty damn good return. Torres is not yet 24 years old and according to Spotrac has 4 more years of team control.

 

[LL3]

At $17.5 option, with 1/2 mill buyout. .. batting .212 3 HR ... not all to certain.


[


Then what is the comp? NYY fans think Gray is fair comparison. But Gray wasn’t Gray till Reds (all hype).

Others,
Greinke — But, owed $32 mill per year for 2-1/2 years. Got Houston 3,4,5 prospects ... some just out of top 100 for a 36 year old.
Archer - Meadows and Glasnow ... he had few good years but had 2.5 years of 4 ERA before trade. Meadows and Glasnow were both top 100 talent who slipped in their transition.
Gray from Oakland — Fowler, Mateo and Kaprielian who were 4th, 8th and 12th prospects.But, remember after 3 good years in Oak, he had 5.69 ERA and 3,43 ERA before trade ...
So all up and down guys. Not looking for top 10 guy like Machado ... thought More like top 20-40 guy then somewhere towards bottom of top 100. Would you give up Jones and say Freeman for Clevinger? Two unproven guys for a top-10 pitcher (sorry if Beiber/Kluber took cy young votes from him)? Most prospects, even top 100 guys need time to pan out if they ever do. There is lack of good pitching, so Clev is one of those guys behind Beiber, Bauer, Cole, and few others.... He just gets overlooked in Cleveland but #1 on most other teams.

[/QUOTE]

As I noted re: the Santana option, there is a great deal of financial uncertainty moving forward. Does that increase the value of very low cost, top prospects -- probably. IF that is the case, most previous comps go out the window. It would not be utterly shocking to me if Lindor plays out his contract in Cleveland...if he does not return adequate value, they may decide to keep him in what should be another competitive season. That scenario would have seemed impossible to me 8=9 months ago.

 

[Derek]

Andujar slashed .284 / .324 / .516 in September 2018 with 4 HR in 102 plate appearances. Only hit .200/.333/.200 in the playoffs but a tiny 12 plate appearance sample. He definitely has not looked good in his limited action post-surgery and his defense is very bad. I completely get why people may be down on Andujar.

Torres' 2019 was a bit of a roller coaster of average to spectacular offensive production. He had a sub-par September yes, but then was the Yankees' best player in the posteason.

I think Torres + Andujar would be a pretty damn good return. Torres is not yet 24 years old and according to Spotrac has 4 more years of team control.

I can't imagine the Yankees would part with Torres. That has to be a fan-created scenario. Makes no sense for them to deal a highly regarded young player with plenty of team control, who also just mashed 38 HR last year.

I don't think much of Andujar though, to be honest. I thought his initial success was flukey and then he got hurt.

 

[xmasbuck]

As I noted re: the Santana option, there is a great deal of financial uncertainty moving forward. Does that increase the value of very low cost, top prospects -- probably. IF that is the case, most previous comps go out the window. It would not be utterly shocking to me if Lindor plays out his contract in Cleveland...if he does not return adequate value, they may decide to keep him in what should be another competitive season. That scenario would have seemed impossible to me 8=9 months ago.
[/QUOTE]
there is indeed a great of uncertainty going forward for teams AND for players - Santana is a notoriously slow starter yet he still has 30, 40? 50? games to get things turned around --- if it doesnt change enough I think the f.o. should give him his 500g's and offer him a smaller contract -- aint no one in baseball giving him 17.5 next season (unless the tribe picks up his option)

 

[Derek]

there is indeed a great of uncertainty going forward for teams AND for players - Santana is a notoriously slow starter yet he still has 30, 40? 50? games to get things turned around --- if it doesnt change enough I think the f.o. should give him his 500g's and offer him a smaller contract -- aint no one in baseball giving him 17.5 next season (unless the tribe picks up his option)

I think you're wrong there. If he's willing to sign a one-year deal, I could see him getting $20 million+. Obviously, if he's looking for multiple years, the AAV will drop, but Josh Donaldson just got 1 year $23 million last season from Atlanta and he was coming off a much worse season than what Santana is having at a similar age.

If we want Santana back next year, which we should, we need to pick up his option. I believe we will considering how we have handled team options in the past.

 

[petes999]

Outside of a shitty 2016, Gray's track record in Oakland is similar enough to Clevinger's success in Cleveland to make that a more apt comp, in my opinion. A perfect comp likely doesn't exist. I'm just saying Sale was THAT GUY when he was traded and rightfully netted Chicago a primetime collection of talent.

I also think it's a near-lock that Santana's option is picked up. Not a chance our FO is looking at a 30 game sample when making million $ decisions.

Okay ... even if Gray is a better comparison ... I forgot to add that the trade in 2017 was right after NYY traded Chapman and Miller in 2016 ... Therefore, when I said 4th,8th 12th prospect ... the pre 2017 prospect list had Mateo at #47 and Kaprielian at #58. The other prospect Dustin Fowler is listed on BA and BP top 100 (barely but there) for pre-2018.

And, while I am correcting myself ... Moncada was listed as #2 prospect and Kopech was listed as #20 prospect in 2017 (released a few weeks after the trade so my #70 was a mid-season 96 report used at time of trade and thus news clippings I was quoting was out of date).

Also other comps -- Andrew Miller -- got Frazier (top 25 talent and Shefield top 80 talent). Also Glasnow and Meadows in Archer trade were both top 10 the year before the trade (as I said a rough transition in 2017 diminished their value -- and the best player is turning out to be Baz a #1 draft pick that is now top 30).

So yes, Sale was a top 3-5 Cy Young vote getter in years before trade (so Top 5 or so pitcher) but Clevinger isn't that far behind (top 10-15 say). The comp is probably between Sale and Gray as 5+ ERA does hinder your value)... So a top 20-40 prospect and 50-80 prospect plus some more isn't that far fetch (and what I was using as a rule of thumb).

2017 Top 100 MLB Prospects list

Here's a look at MLB.com's 2017 preseason Top 100 Prospects list:

www.mlb.com

Lastly, a 30-game season would not normally be the point of reference for paying a guy $17 million. But, we have 30 more plus games to go and the key issue is that he is 34 years old now and 35 years old next year. Just look at Hafner and their analysis of when hitters lose their stuff (early 30s).... Plus, after this year, the free agent market maybe slower than normal due to lack of cash (so hopefully Santana is willing to renegotiate to a fairer deal for both sides - to avoid Bradley).

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

Outside of a shitty 2016, Gray's track record in Oakland is similar enough to Clevinger's success in Cleveland to make that a more apt comp, in my opinion. A perfect comp likely doesn't exist. I'm just saying Sale was THAT GUY when he was traded and rightfully netted Chicago a primetime collection of talent.

I also think it's a near-lock that Santana's option is picked up. Not a chance our FO is looking at a 30 game sample when making million $ decisions.

I'm sure they're also not using batting average to evaluate a hitter's worth

 

[Derek]

Okay ... even if Gray is a better comparison ... I forgot to add that the trade in 2017 was right after NYY traded Chapman and Miller in 2016 ... Therefore, when I said 4th,8th 12th prospect ... the pre 2017 prospect list had Mateo at #47 and Kaprielian at #58. The other prospect Dustin Fowler is listed on BA and BP top 100 (barely but there) for pre-2018.

And, while I am correcting myself ... Moncada was listed as #2 prospect and Kopech was listed as #20 prospect in 2017 (released a few weeks after the trade so my #70 was a mid-season 96 report used at time of trade and thus news clippings I was quoting was out of date).

Also other comps -- Andrew Miller -- got Frazier (top 25 talent and Shefield top 80 talent). Also Glasnow and Meadows in Archer trade were both top 10 the year before the trade (as I said a rough transition in 2017 diminished their value -- and the best player is turning out to be Baz a #1 draft pick that is now top 30).

So yes, Sale was a top 3-5 Cy Young vote getter in years before trade (so Top 5 or so pitcher) but Clevinger isn't that far behind (top 10-15 say). The comp is probably between Sale and Gray as 5+ ERA does hinder your value)... So a top 20-40 prospect and 50-80 prospect plus some more isn't that far fetch (and what I was using as a rule of thumb).

2017 Top 100 MLB Prospects list

Here's a look at MLB.com's 2017 preseason Top 100 Prospects list:

www.mlb.com

Lastly, a 30-game season would not normally be the point of reference for paying a guy $17 million. But, we have 30 more plus games to go and the key issue is that he is 34 years old now and 35 years old next year. Just look at Hafner and their analysis of when hitters lose their stuff (early 30s).... Plus, after this year, the free agent market maybe slower than normal due to lack of cash (so hopefully Santana is willing to renegotiate to a fairer deal for both sides - to avoid Bradley).

I’m just telling you, I would be absolutely floored if the Indians didn’t pick up Santana’s option.

He’s shown no signs of falling off physically.

Just because 30-60 games is all we have this year, doesn’t mean 30-60 games will mean anything extra in terms of evaluating talent and making decisions.

If the Indians don’t pick up his option, he’s not coming back. He’ll be gone, and it will be a gaffe by the FO.

 

[sportscoach]

If we had more production from our OF, we would be a sure bet playoff team this season. Right now we still have the best starting rotation in baseball on paper so we still are contenders.

Hernandez is the only player we dont have a true replacement for production wise and its not currently in the budget to resign.

@petes999 and the other peeps who wants to not do Santana's option, ill be straight up, if we don't take Santana's option we may as well fire sell, Lindor and Clev. I know getting rid of one guy isn't a make or break, but projection of Losing Hernandez and then losing Santana with not a super strong lineup to begin with, will 100% put us out of the playoffs in my mind. We have to retain Santana, its not a may, its a must in my mind. He is too import to this team! Plain and simple (sounds like @Derek and me are on a similar page regarding Santana).

 

[petes999]

I'm sure they're also not using batting average to evaluate a hitter's worth

So Santana has only one .900+ season OPS (.911 in 2019) and next recent highest is .865 in 2016 (.818 in 2017, .766 in 2018 and .716 so far this year). Donaldson off year (in 2019) was .900 and had been that way or higher since 2015 (other than time when injured in 2018 in Toronto). Thus if Donaldson gets $20 million for hitting .900 or above at 3rd (pre-Covid) ... what does Santana get for doing it once (.815 career) at 1B when many teams will be looking to cut payroll ... not $17 million (that is why we asked for cash in the deal).

 

[petes999]

You guys maybe right on Santana .... Yet, with everyone in media saying teams are cash strapped and even a Lindor trade maybe tricky, I don't know how much money will be flowing around next offseason (just as vaccine is coming out). I can see them renegotiating at $10-12 million (so $5-7 million may not be that much but for a team without revenue and just had a large financial loss it is their penny-pinching means). Also, they didn't want to pay Bauer $20 million this past offseason -- so got what they could (plus free agency coming up).

Others, don't want to pay Hand $10 million option. I can see $18 million better spend with Hand at $10 and Hernandez at $7-$9 million (up from $6 now). Then you can leave Ramirez at 3B and push Jones to 1B for a year or two. And, I do recognize the clubhouse effect of Santana ... but you also will need to decide if Lindor stays or goes like Bauer. Lindor has the bigger effect than Santana - that is the initial driving force on if we spend money next year to go all in or not. Also, look at $17 million for Kluber ... we dumped it for what we could (they weren't thinking he would be injured the first game but he is 34 ... the fall off years).

Also remember they have Bauers who can come back to 1st base ... aggg ... Yandy Diaz and his .816 OPS would be looking really good right now. Always said, I would have rather just done Santana part of trade and kept Yandy vs Bauers. But, we needed the money to pay Carlos's salary ($6 million from Mariners to Cle for comp B pick). Trade could have just been Santana plus $1 million for Edwin and Comp B pick ... yet we needed more money (to pay Santana for this year) so sent Diaz + Sulser (who cares) for Bauers and $5 million. Oh well ... now we play games to get people to fit ...

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

So Santana has only one .900+ season OPS (.911 in 2019) and next recent highest is .865 in 2016 (.818 in 2017, .766 in 2018 and .716 so far this year). Donaldson off year (in 2019) was .900 and had been that way or higher since 2015 (other than time when injured in 2018 in Toronto). Thus if Donaldson gets $20 million for hitting .900 or above at 3rd (pre-Covid) ... what does Santana get for doing it once (.815 career) at 1B when many teams will be looking to cut payroll ... not $17 million (that is why we asked for cash in the deal).

I have no horse in the race of comparing Santana and Donaldson in terms of what each could fetch in terms of a one-year deal. I'm just pointing out that using batting average is silly--as you well know, since your response is using a stat with some value like OPS.

But, I think in terms of Donaldson's contract, him losing most of the previous year due to injury, and then not looking terrific when he came back for us, plays a big part in it.

 

[sportscoach]

You guys maybe right on Santana .... Yet, with everyone in media saying teams are cash strapped and even a Lindor trade maybe tricky, I don't know how much money will be flowing around next offseason (just as vaccine is coming out). I can see them renegotiating at $10-12 million (so $5-7 million may not be that much but for a team without revenue and just had a large financial loss it is their penny-pinching means). Also, they didn't want to pay Bauer $20 million this past offseason -- so got what they could (plus free agency coming up).

Others, don't want to pay Hand $10 million option. I can see $18 million better spend with Hand at $10 and Hernandez at $7-$9 million (up from $6 now). Then you can leave Ramirez at 3B and push Jones to 1B for a year or two. And, I do recognize the clubhouse effect of Santana ... but you also will need to decide if Lindor stays or goes like Bauer. Lindor has the bigger effect than Santana - that is the initial driving force on if we spend money next year to go all in or not. Also, look at $17 million for Kluber ... we dumped it for what we could (they weren't thinking he would be injured the first game but he is 34 ... the fall off years).

Also remember they have Bauers who can come back to 1st base ... aggg ... Yandy Diaz and his .816 OPS would be looking really good right now. Always said, I would have rather just done Santana part of trade and kept Yandy vs Bauers. But, we needed the money to pay Carlos's salary ($6 million from Mariners to Cle for comp B pick). Trade could have just been Santana plus $1 million for Edwin and Comp B pick ... yet we needed more money (to pay Santana for this year) so sent Diaz + Sulser (who cares) for Bauers and $5 million. Oh well ... now we play games to get people to fit ...

So your plan essentially says, dont do Santana's option, do Hands and resign Hernandez, then put Jones (a high prospect, but hasn't played above AA) to a position he doesnt know and expect to be able to compete with a Twins lineup that set records in 19, and likely have a legit chance in 21 to put up those standards again?

Thats the whole issue, we cannot just let go of one of the best hitters we have overall and expect us to compete in the division which likely will have two of the best offenses in baseball, In Chicago and Minnesota. If the FO and management had faith in Bauers and Bradley, they would be up with the main roster, especially Bauers.

 

[Martyinnewyork]

Scary to think about how bad Bauers must look in Lake County for him to be not even called up in the midst of our outfield debacle.

 

[Wham with the Right Hand]

Scary to think about how bad Bauers must look in Lake County for him to be not even called up in the midst of our outfield debacle.

Yeah, especially since we're so desperate for a left-handed hitting outfielder besides Naquin that we're putting Freeman out there.