Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Passan: Free Giancarlo Stanton: Why the Marlins need to trade baseball’s home run king

What would Jeter do?

For the next 16 days, the Marlins can present contending teams with an alluring possibility: Trade for the hottest hitter alive, a 6-foot-6, 250-pound machine whose 10 home runs in his last 11 games give him a Major League Baseball-leading 43 this season. Stanton cleared waivers on Sunday, multiple sources told Yahoo Sports, allowing the Marlins to deal him to any team through the end of August.

eddieot Posted: August 15, 2017 at 12:24 PM | 50 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: giancarlo stanton, marlins

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 15, 2017 at 06:04 PM (#5513933)
Stanton is 27, and currently having his best season ever. Yes, he's about to get more expensive, but the Marlins can afford at least one contract like that. Stanton gives the Marlins something to market even if they are not contenders for the next year or two (perhaps longer), and that has enormous value. The new ownership is going to try to attract fans by deloriazing the franchise as rapidly as possible - trading Stanton would completely negate that strategy.
   2. geonose Posted: August 15, 2017 at 06:06 PM (#5513935)
Well, no, the Marlins aren't really free to deal him to any team. He has a full no-trade clause, so he gets to pick where he goes - if he goes.
   3. Man o' Schwar Posted: August 15, 2017 at 06:12 PM (#5513945)
Stanton gives the Marlins something to market even if they are not contenders for the next year or two (perhaps longer), and that has enormous value.

Can you imagine the backlash in Miami if they traded Stanton at this point for a bunch of minor leaguers? They don't draw as is, and football season (pro and college) is just around the corner. They might not get 100,000 fans for the rest of the games this season combined.
   4. Ziggy: The Platonic Form of Russell Branyan Posted: August 15, 2017 at 06:37 PM (#5513966)
If they don't draw as it is, it can't be much of a backlash.
   5. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: August 15, 2017 at 06:39 PM (#5513968)
Besides that, the fact that he cleared waivers should clue us in that at least 29 out of 30 GMs believe he has zero-to-negative trade value.

It's not the yearly expense that's the poison pill here. It's the nature of his contract, with its opt-out: if he stays awesome you have him for three more years at well below market value, and then he's a free agent. Great. But if he stops being awesome, then you're on the hook for two hundred eighteen million dollars through 2027. That's more risk than even the Yankees and Dodgers want to swallow.
   6. Tim D Posted: August 15, 2017 at 06:43 PM (#5513971)
If nobody wants him on a waiver claim I doubt there is anybody who wants to pick up his deal and give Miami a bunch of prospects. Back to the Verlander situation, how much salary do you have to eat to get some decent prospects? He's in his prime whereas Verlander is past his, but Stanton gets hurt all the time and is under contract for TEN more years.
   7. Khrushin it bro Posted: August 15, 2017 at 06:55 PM (#5513984)
Who are they going to get with that contract? If I'm a team like the Dodgers or Yankees I just wait for Bryce Harper to hit the market if I want a max 10 year contract.
   8. RJ in TO Posted: August 15, 2017 at 07:14 PM (#5513994)
Who are they going to get with that contract? If I'm a team like the Dodgers or Yankees I just wait for Bryce Harper to hit the market if I want a max 10 year contract.


Not that I disagree with your general statement, but if you're the Yankees or Dodgers, maybe you don't want to have to wait and see if you can outbid the Dodgers or Yankees for Bryce Harper.
   9. Khrushin it bro Posted: August 15, 2017 at 07:26 PM (#5514000)
Ya good point.
   10. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: August 15, 2017 at 07:30 PM (#5514003)
Can he play 1B...the Red Sox could really use a good 1B.
   11. phredbird Posted: August 15, 2017 at 08:13 PM (#5514040)
wrong thread
   12. Walt Davis Posted: August 15, 2017 at 09:31 PM (#5514124)
Can he play 1B...the Red Sox could really use a good 1B.

Sorry, making a deal with Mitch Moreland is like making a deal with the devil. For reasons that often aren't even clear at the time, it seems like it will work in your advantage but it never does and unless you've got Daniel Webster (or Marge Simpson) in your corner, you're stuck with him. So even if the Sox landed another 1B now, he would either be immediately injured or manage to suck at sub-Morelandian levels and Moreland would be right back in the lineup.

Just ask our local theologian BDC.
   13. Random Transaction Generator Posted: August 15, 2017 at 10:38 PM (#5514167)
If you were looking to absolutely kill any remaining hope in the Marlins fan base, trading away Stanton during his best (and healthiest) season is the best way to do it.
I mean, why the #### would a person want to cheer for the Marlins if they dealt him?
   14. The Duke Posted: August 15, 2017 at 11:25 PM (#5514237)
Of course they are going to deal him - this is how private businesses make money. Lever up and then either cut costs or sell assets or both. They can be a .500 team without Stanton and his contract. I predict he gets dealt without them having to eat any money and At least one solid prospect back. There are only so many truly transformative sluggers.

   15. Walt Davis Posted: August 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM (#5514249)
Stanton should be sitting on 300 career HRs by the time the season wraps up. :-)
   16. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 15, 2017 at 11:56 PM (#5514252)
Of course they are going to deal him - this is how private businesses make money. Lever up and then either cut costs or sell assets or both. They can be a .500 team without Stanton and his contract. I predict he gets dealt without them having to eat any money and At least one solid prospect back. There are only so many truly transformative sluggers.

That seems to assume that the Marlins revenue is limited to what was achieved under prior ownership. I doubt Jeter (or perhaps even Sherman) would have been interested in buying the team if he believed that. Stanton is a key to boosting the revenue stream in the near term. For that reason alone, he will not be dealt
   17. JAHV Posted: August 16, 2017 at 12:08 AM (#5514257)
It would be really dumb to trade him. He's the main attraction on that team, and really the only big draw since Fernandez's passing. He's having his best season but still wouldn't fetch a great prospect haul simply because of the nature of his contract. So you're trading something the fans love and wouldn't even be getting a great return.

Marlins fans deserve to have Stanton around to entertain them.
   18. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: August 16, 2017 at 12:20 AM (#5514261)
Marlins fans deserve to have Stanton around to entertain them.


Bwaaa, haaaa, haaaa...what the fans deserve and what transpires are never really linked. Or as the kids say today, deservings got nuthing to do with it.

Look I can see the arguments for keeping him in Florida and that contract is a hindrance to any trade, but I agree with Duke, your leverage is never going to be higher, nor his value, they might score something really good in return if they genuinely explore this option.
   19. Jose is an Absurd Doubles Machine Posted: August 16, 2017 at 12:29 AM (#5514264)
Stanton should be sitting on 300 career HRs by the time the week wraps up. :-)


Fixed that for you.
   20. PreservedFish Posted: August 16, 2017 at 08:48 AM (#5514302)
Besides that, the fact that he cleared waivers should clue us in that at least 29 out of 30 GMs believe he has zero-to-negative trade value.


I don't think that this is necessarily true. It's my belief that we frankly don't understand much about waivers.
   21. Jose is an Absurd Doubles Machine Posted: August 16, 2017 at 09:06 AM (#5514310)
Is there a cost for putting in a waiver claim on someone or does a cost only get incurred when you acquire the player?
   22. Nasty Nate Posted: August 16, 2017 at 09:12 AM (#5514314)
Sometimes no one claims great players in August if there is zero chance he will be traded, eg Harper this year. I don't know if Stanton is in that category.
   23. PreservedFish Posted: August 16, 2017 at 09:23 AM (#5514321)
I don't think there's a cost. But how about this? Stanton is on the hook for $300 million or so. Let's say you're the GM of some team and you'd love to add him. But you don't have a blanket approval to just unilaterally add $300M. That requires owner approval. It requires an analysis from the marketing department. And Stanton is just one of dozens of great players on the waiver wire - Bryce Harper is on the wire too! - so do you go through the whole process for every one of them? Likely not.
   24. PreservedFish Posted: August 16, 2017 at 09:25 AM (#5514322)
I mean, the simple fact that Bryce Harper is on waivers at all proves to me that I do not understand the system. What possible good can come of that?
   25. Nasty Nate Posted: August 16, 2017 at 09:42 AM (#5514329)
I mean, the simple fact that Bryce Harper is on waivers at all proves to me that I do not understand the system. What possible good can come of that?
The only thing I can think of is something similar to Yahoo fantasy baseball (bear with me), where you can flood the transactions list with changes to your "trading block" and an insignificant player drop or 2, so that someone might not notice that an actual good player is out there.

Or maybe there's a rolling waiver priority, so if a team puts in a claim for Harper, they move to the back of the line even if he is pulled back, so when a plausibly-traded player gets put through, the Nationals are ahead of that team in line. Or maybe in the interim between the claim and the Nationals pulling him back, the other teams can't make another claim elsewhere. I have no idea if that's actually how it works.
   26. BDC Posted: August 16, 2017 at 09:43 AM (#5514331)
ust ask our local theologian BDC

Mitch Moreland's greatest trick has been to convince his teams that he does not exist.
   27. PreservedFish Posted: August 16, 2017 at 09:48 AM (#5514334)
Here's a whole article regarding Bryce Harper on waivers. There are a few things that make sense to me - if you put all of your players on waivers, it doesn't tip your hand as to which players you actually want to get rid of, thereby preserving some negotiating leverage. But mostly it still doesn't make a ton of sense: "But more often than not, most August waiver-wheeling is procedural — done just to be safe, for the sake of due diligence, without much intent."
   28. Nasty Nate Posted: August 16, 2017 at 09:48 AM (#5514335)
Mitch Moreland's greatest trick has been to convince his teams that he does not exist.
I would nominate Ricky Nolasco as the pitching equivalent of Moreland, as he STILL is being given the ball every 5 days. However, he usually is just an innings-eater on also-rans, while Moreland has been inexplicably starting on good teams.
   29. PreservedFish Posted: August 16, 2017 at 09:52 AM (#5514337)
Many players have been traded since the deadline. Did all of them go to the claiming team? Or did some of them "clear" waivers only to be then traded for something of value?
   30. Nasty Nate Posted: August 16, 2017 at 09:54 AM (#5514339)
Some of them cleared waivers.
Here's a whole article regarding Bryce Harper on waivers.
Thanks. But a lot of the reasons given for putting players on waivers wouldn't apply to Harper, and I think the author acknowledges as such.
   31. Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington Posted: August 16, 2017 at 10:08 AM (#5514348)
Or maybe there's a rolling waiver priority, so if a team puts in a claim for Harper, they move to the back of the line even if he is pulled back, so when a plausibly-traded player gets put through, the Nationals are ahead of that team in line. Or maybe in the interim between the claim and the Nationals pulling him back, the other teams can't make another claim elsewhere. I have no idea if that's actually how it works.

No, that is definitely not how it works.
   32. Nasty Nate Posted: August 16, 2017 at 10:13 AM (#5514350)
Thanks. That makes more sense than my hypothetical.
   33. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: August 16, 2017 at 10:48 AM (#5514384)
I would absolutely be putting in waiver claims on guys like Harper just on the one in a thousand shot that the person clicking yes/no accidentally accepts my claim.

I also feel like the deal Stanton got was incredibly stupid from the Marlins perspective, but I'd much rather him remain a Marlin than get traded somewhere because the Marlins can never have nice things.
   34. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: August 16, 2017 at 10:54 AM (#5514390)
Yeah, why shouldn't someone on welfare get to splurge on a luxury car? It'll do wonders for their self-image.
   35. bunyon Posted: August 16, 2017 at 11:31 AM (#5514413)
I, for one, am rooting for him to be traded to Colorado. I've never seen a 1,000th home run.
   36. SoSH U at work Posted: August 16, 2017 at 11:44 AM (#5514425)

I, for one, am rooting for him to be traded to Colorado. I've never seen a 1,000th home run.


I wonder how much it would truly benefit him (or benefit him more than others). It doesn't seem as if he's losing a lot of would-be homers at the warning track. His tend to travel a lot farther than the necessary distance.

But I'm with Clapper and others. Trading him would be insane when the new ownership group is, I'm sure, trying to convince Miamians that it's not going to be Marlins business as usual.
   37. PreservedFish Posted: August 16, 2017 at 11:50 AM (#5514435)
It doesn't seem as if he's losing a lot of would-be homers at the warning track. His tend to travel a lot farther than the necessary distance.


He still benefits from the curveballs that don't curve, though.
   38. Greg Pope Posted: August 16, 2017 at 11:51 AM (#5514437)
unless you've got Daniel Webster (or Marge Simpson) in your corner

Or Mike Nesmith.
   39. SoSH U at work Posted: August 16, 2017 at 12:04 PM (#5514452)
He still benefits from the curveballs that don't curve, though.


Sure, but so does everyone, which is why I wondered in the parenthetical if he would benefit more than others.
   40. PreservedFish Posted: August 16, 2017 at 12:12 PM (#5514458)
Plenty of flyball outs. He murders the ball when he pulls it. I'm not counting dots, but it looks like about 65% of the time he hits it deep to leftfield (ie beyond the place where the average LF stands), it goes over the fence. But to rightfield, it's more like 25%. Lots of warning track outs to right. That might be where he sees the Coors anti-gravity benefit.

Edit > Holy crap, his career SLG at Coors is .797
   41. SoSH U at work Posted: August 16, 2017 at 12:24 PM (#5514467)
Plenty of flyball outs. He murders the ball when he pulls it. I'm not counting dots, but it looks like about 65% of the time he hits it deep to leftfield (ie beyond the place where the average LF stands), it goes over the fence. But to rightfield, it's more like 25%. Lots of warning track outs to right. That might be where he sees the Coors anti-gravity benefit.


Is this distribution different from other home run hitters?

Obviously, he's going to benefit. I'm just curious if there is any reason he would benefit more?
   42. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 16, 2017 at 12:43 PM (#5514489)
Sorry, this isn't precisely relevant to the Stanton discussion, but it seems an ok thread to drop it here since SLG and power are being discussed.

It relates to Aaron Judge. He was hitting 319/442/671 through July 15.

In the month since he's hit 191/353/404 to drop his overall numbers to 290/421/609.

He was striking out in 30% of his PA through July 15 (112/373).

In the month since he's struck out in 39% of his PA (46/119). (46 K in 94 AB too.)

Through July 15, Judge had put up the best on-contact numbers in baseball history: a .500 batting average and a 1.051 SLG, for a 1551 OPS.

Below are the charts through July 15. Can someone who is better than me at b-r update these tables with where Judge stands on these lists (if at all) today?

OPS on contact, min. 400 PA, 1919-2016):

Year    AVG    SLG    OPS
Judge thru 7
/15  2017   .500  1.051   1551
Mark McGwire     1998   .425  1.070   1495
Babe Ruth        1920   .455  1.026   1481
Barry Bonds      2001   .405  1.068   1473
Babe Ruth        1921   .444   .996   1440
Mark McGwire     1996   .423   .990   1413
Manny Ramirez    2000   .472   .939   1411
Sammy Sosa       2001   .433   .975   1408
Babe Ruth        1923   .478   .930   1408
Jim Thome        2001   .445   .953   1398
Ryan Howard      2006   .448   .943   1391 


Batting average on contact:

Year    AVG
Judge thru 7
/15  2017   .500
Babe Ruth        1923   .478
Manny Ramirez    2000   .472
Babe Ruth        1920   .455
Ryan Howard      2006   .448
Babe Ruth        1924   .446
Jim Thome        2001   .445
Reggie Jefferson 2006   .445
Babe Ruth        1921   .444
Mo Vaughn        1997   .441
Babe Ruth        1926   .439 


SLG on contact:

Year    SLG
Mark McGwire     1998  1.070
Barry Bonds      2001  1.068
Judge thru 7
/15  2017  1.051
Babe Ruth        1920  1.026
Babe Ruth        1921   .996
Mark McGwire     1996   .990
Sammy Sosa       2001   .975
Jim Thome        2001   .953
Chris Davis      2013   .944
Ryan Howard      2006   .943
Mark McGwire     1999   .943 
   43. PreservedFish Posted: August 16, 2017 at 12:46 PM (#5514493)
Obviously, he's going to benefit. I'm just curious if there is any reason he would benefit more?


Dunno.
   44. bunyon Posted: August 16, 2017 at 01:39 PM (#5514539)
Right. It's an experiment. Let's stick him in Denver and see what happens.
   45. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: August 16, 2017 at 04:50 PM (#5514659)
Edit > Holy crap, his career SLG at Coors is .797


Yeah, but the thing about that is, when he's at Coors he's always facing Rockies pitchers.
   46. Walt Davis Posted: August 16, 2017 at 07:49 PM (#5514837)
Rox pitchers are tied for 2nd in NL pitcher WAA, 3rd in SP and RP. Last year they were 5th in SP but had a terrible bullpen.

Not many PAs and mostly towards the end of his career but, at Fenway, Kingman hit 276/345/816 with 13 HR in 84 PA. Yes, that's a 540 ISO -- just 21 hits with 2 doubles to go with the 13 HR.

I suspect Mr. Stanton would similarly benefit from every one of those flyballs to LF either going over of off the Monster.
   47. Rally Posted: August 16, 2017 at 09:48 PM (#5514945)
Stanton is pretty good against Rockie pitching at home too, his overall SLG against them is .785. He's got 20 homers against the Rockies, evenly split between Coors and Florida.
   48. cmd600 Posted: August 16, 2017 at 10:22 PM (#5514966)
I mean, why the #### would a person want to cheer for the Marlins if they dealt him?


Because you can spend $25-30M a year on more wins than just he can bring you. At some point a team can't just listen to the will of talk radio callers as to how they manage their team. And besides, fans can be awfully forgiving if you can go on to win 90 games and a divisional pennant. Not that I expect the Marlins to figure out how to do that, but thats a problem with Stanton (as Marlins fans are currently showing) or without. The Marlins drew 17k tonight. You could see some boosts as he hits big milestones, but you aren't drawing many casuals down to park just to see what he might do next.
   49. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 16, 2017 at 10:36 PM (#5514979)
Because you can spend $25-30M a year on more wins than just he can bring you.

Stanton's at least a 4 WAR player. You can't buy 4 WAR in the FA market for $25-30M.

There's no benefit to trading an expensive star who's worth his contract. No one is giving you much value for a player being paid fair value, and replacing him will cost just as much.
   50. cmd600 Posted: August 17, 2017 at 03:12 AM (#5515080)
Stanton's at least a 4 WAR player


This year. Last year he was a two win player. And teams don't operate in vacuums as much as we do on message boards. The Marlins would trade him if they think they can replace him at better prices. If they cant get much back or replace four wins for cheaper, they wont move him.

Besides, this misses what is actually my point, that you have to do what makes sense to you regarding talent on the field, not what a bunch of angry dudes who have Mad Dog on speed dial want you to do. If the Marlins think they can get to a pennant quicker by reloading with cheaper talent than having Stanton chew up a large portion of their payroll, well its not like theyre drawing many fans just to see Stanton as is.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
HowardMegdal
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 9-22-2017
(28 - 1:11pm, Sep 22)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogOTP 18 September 2017: Ex-Baseball Star Darryl Strawberry Criticizes Jemele Hill, Praises POTUS: Trump is ‘A Great Man’
(1145 - 1:09pm, Sep 22)
Last: Ray (RDP)

Newsblog‘Highly unlikely’ Mets risk Harvey burning them — with another team | New York Post
(14 - 1:09pm, Sep 22)
Last: TheHomeRunsOfJuanPierre

NewsblogRobinson Cano hits 300th home run | MLB.com
(13 - 1:07pm, Sep 22)
Last: Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad)

NewsblogOzzie and the MVP | Articles | Bill James Online
(5 - 1:06pm, Sep 22)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogWhere have you gone, Tim Lincecum? In search of beloved Giants ace
(19 - 12:48pm, Sep 22)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogMarlins’ Brian Anderson — inspired by Brian Anderson and Brian Anderson — has one of the most common names in baseball history - Sun Sentinel
(18 - 12:44pm, Sep 22)
Last: Perry

NewsblogMLB, Rob Manfred must expand protective netting | SI.com
(64 - 12:40pm, Sep 22)
Last: base ball chick

Sox TherapyStep One Complete
(24 - 12:38pm, Sep 22)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

Newsblog‘Friends,’ the Sitcom That’s Still a Hit in Major League Baseball
(431 - 12:26pm, Sep 22)
Last: Man o' Schwar

NewsblogThe Rangers release artists’ renderings of their new ballpark
(19 - 12:22pm, Sep 22)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogOT-NBA off season thread
(2432 - 11:53am, Sep 22)
Last: 2 dudes are better than STIGGLES; i'm both of em

Gonfalon Cubs15 To Go
(77 - 11:50am, Sep 22)
Last: Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington

NewsblogOT: New Season August 2017 Soccer Thread
(728 - 11:29am, Sep 22)
Last: Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB)

NewsblogA’s preferred stadium site criticized for causing gentrification, killing waterfowl | Field of Schemes
(79 - 11:26am, Sep 22)
Last: Traderdave

Page rendered in 0.7700 seconds
47 querie(s) executed