2021 MLB Offseason Thread

[mse326]

Just now, ramssuperbowl99 said:

What deals they agree to after the Padres back out shouldn't change how we view the Padres backing out in the first place.

That's fair. That goes to the morality point. I tend to agree though without knowing the discussions and agreements I'm not positive. I probably took "burned" to literal as to actually mean the players are losing something, as that no doubt happens all the time too.

[Eagles27]

 

[beekay414]

Cohen doesn't have the balls to trade deGrom does he?

[beekay414]

 

[KhanYouDigIt]

Kris Bryant to Braves plz

[Slateman]

9 hours ago, hrubes20 said:

Lots to point out here:

1.  Darvish obviously was amazing in this fake Covid year, but people don't realize that his Cub breakout actually started midway of 2019.  He's been arguably a top 5 pitcher in baseball over the past 18 months.  

2.  Darvish is indeed 34, but his stuff was actually BETTER last year than any other time in his career.  He was over a full mph higher on his fastball.  This isn't a guy that is playing into the twilight of his career.  This is much more of a Justin Verlander situation when he went to Houston and still had the terrific stuff.

3.  You mentioned his contract as a negative, but it's actually a really big positive.  3 years at $20 million a year is a steal for a bona fide ace.  There isn't a team in baseball, other than the Cubs apparently, that wouldn't bring him in for that deal.

Darvish has a crapton of value.  I wish he would just stay with the Cubs and ownership would open up their massive wallets to do what needs to be done to keep the team competitive, but the writing is on the wall.  As such, a trade of Darvish right now would speed up the next rebuild substantially.  

No he really doesnt. He's owed 60 million and he's going to be 34. If you get one good season out of him, that's good. You're not getting a top 25 prospect for that. Particularly since Snell got barely that.

[beekay414]

 

[THE DUKE]

How long before the Padres sign Trevor Bauer?

[hrubes20]

14 hours ago, Slateman said:

No he really doesnt. He's owed 60 million and he's going to be 34. If you get one good season out of him, that's good. You're not getting a top 25 prospect for that. Particularly since Snell got barely that.

Apparently you remembered the fact that nobody is even making an effort to build their teams up right now, except the Padres.  In a normal, non-pandemic world, Darvish nets a top 25 prospect quite easily.  His age is nothing, as I've already mentioned he actually had the best stuff of his career this past year.  Would you have traded Max Scherzer 3 years ago?  Because that's how good Darvish has been since mid-2019.  And he's $10 million cheaper per year. 

[Slateman]

 

[Slateman]

2 hours ago, hrubes20 said:

Apparently you remembered the fact that nobody is even making an effort to build their teams up right now, except the Padres.  In a normal, non-pandemic world, Darvish nets a top 25 prospect quite easily.  His age is nothing, as I've already mentioned he actually had the best stuff of his career this past year.  Would you have traded Max Scherzer 3 years ago?  Because that's how good Darvish has been since mid-2019.  And he's $10 million cheaper per year. 

So not even a full season vs a HoF track record? Scherzer didnt have an injury history. 

Yea, no. Darvish was never going to get a top 25 prospect. Not with 60 million left on his deal, being age 34, and that injury history.

But I'm sure you're right. I'm sure the Cubs definitely did a salary dump and took less than they could have gotten. 

Edited December 29, 2020 by Slateman

[hrubes20]

Just now, Slateman said:

So not even a full season vs a HoF track record? Scherzer was only 30 and didnt have an injury history. 

Yea, no. Darvish was never going to get a top 25 prospect. Not with 60 million left on his deal, being age 34, and that injury history.

This is such a unique scenario that there is no precedent for us to look at.  We will just have to agree to disagree on this.

[Slateman]

1 minute ago, hrubes20 said:

This is such a unique scenario that there is no precedent for us to look at.  We will just have to agree to disagree on this.

Find me a 34 year old who was traded for a top 25 prospect.

Theres nothing unique about this. Guys on the back end of their contracts simply don't have that much value.

Edited December 29, 2020 by Slateman

[hrubes20]

27 minutes ago, Slateman said:

Find me a 34 year old who was traded for a top 25 prospect.

Theres nothing unique about this. Guys on the back end of their contracts simply don't have that much value.

There are literally no examples of a 34 year old; performing as a top 5 SP in the entire game; seeing INCREASES in their stuff the past season; signed for 3 more years at below market rates; getting traded.  Justin Verlander is the closest, as he was 34 when he was dealt to Houston, but his stuff was ticking down and he wasn't performing well at the time.  He was essentially going the opposite of Darvish at time of their respective trades.  We obviously know he bounced back in a big way, but he was't anywhere near what Darvish has been doing.  Even still, Verlander brought back the #41 prospect in the game (Franklin Perez), along with the team's #9 prospect (Daz Cameron) and #11 prospect (Jake Rogers).  That's really dang close, and in prospect talk, the difference in the #25 prospect and the #41 prospect is borderline negligible.

That package should have been the baseline for a Darvish trade in normal circumstances.  But the state of the game today (and greedy billionarie owners) reduced the Cubs into getting 4 teenage lottery tickets, just to dump salary.  

 

[Slateman]

So basically, you think Darvish is going to continue to perform at that level for the remainder of the contract. Literally no one else thinks that. His injury history alone would refute that. Verlander had had one major injury his whole career, and it wasnt arm related.

If the Padres get one good year out of Darvish, they should consider the deal even.