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

Friday, December 08, 2017

Report: Stanton trade list includes 4 teams | MLB.com

Maybe this info should have leaked out sooner. Maybe Jeter should have included Stanton in the process from the beginning.

On Thursday night, MLB Network Insider Ken Rosenthal reported Stanton is electing not to accept proposed deals to those two teams, both of which had previously worked out trade frameworks with Miami.

The report added Stanton would consider trades to the Dodgers or Yankees. Another report, from Craig Mish of SiriusXM, added the Cubs and Astros to the list of Stanton’s preferred destinations. Thus, what’s next for the slugger promises to be one of the top stories of the Winter Meetings, which begin on Monday in Lake Buena Vista, Fla.

Jim Furtado Posted: December 08, 2017 at 10:17 AM | 43 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. TDF didn't lie, he just didn't remember Posted: December 08, 2017 at 10:36 AM (#5588692)
Because what the Astros are really missing is some offense.
   2. Zonk prescribes Rezine for TDS Posted: December 08, 2017 at 10:40 AM (#5588697)
A straight-up swap for Heyward would save the Fish about 100 mil.... I'm just saying!
   3. Blastin Posted: December 08, 2017 at 10:47 AM (#5588709)
So, 4 of the 5 or 6 best teams because no one wants go to to Cleveland.
   4. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: December 08, 2017 at 11:27 AM (#5588734)
If true this will be an amusing standoff. The Marlins don't really have leverage over Stanton other than a threat to keep him in Miami. I wonder how much cash they would have to eat to move him to one of the teams on his list.
   5. Sleepy's not going to blame himself Posted: December 08, 2017 at 11:41 AM (#5588745)
So I guess the Cardinals didn't finish second in the bidding after all. More like sixth or 30th.

   6. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 08, 2017 at 11:48 AM (#5588754)
Kind of weird that they went that deep into negotiations with the Giants and Cards without running the idea past Stanton first, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised about the Marlins ####### something up.
   7. Blastin Posted: December 08, 2017 at 11:54 AM (#5588761)
No, apparently Stanton actually met with the Giants at least. But the Marlins did clearly mess things up.
   8. JJ1986 Posted: December 08, 2017 at 11:55 AM (#5588762)
Per b-r, if the Marlins dump Yelich, Ozuna, Brad Ziegler, Junichi Tazawa, Dan Straily, Justin Bour and Derek Dietrich, they'd be able to get their payroll down to $80-85 million. I'm assuming they can't move Martin Prado or Wei-Yin Chen's atrocious contract.
   9. rconn23 Posted: December 08, 2017 at 12:00 PM (#5588769)
Wow. Astros, Yankees, Dodgers and Cubs. I think he should add the Patriots and Golden State to that list.
   10. Nasty Nate Posted: December 08, 2017 at 12:29 PM (#5588802)
6. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 08, 2017 at 11:48 AM (#5588754)
Kind of weird that they went that deep into negotiations with the Giants and Cards without running the idea past Stanton first, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised about the Marlins ####### something up.
7. Blastin Posted: December 08, 2017 at 11:54 AM (#5588761)
No, apparently Stanton actually met with the Giants at least. But the Marlins did clearly mess things up.
I may be mixing things up, but I thought I read that Stanton wouldn't waive his no-trade unless he got to meet with the teams, and he wouldn't meet with the teams until after a framework of a deal was reached (which negotiated the deep negotiations).
   11. G. Bostock Posted: December 08, 2017 at 01:04 PM (#5588820)
I find it hard to put all the blame on the Marlins.

One could argue they were trying to do Stanton a favour, trading him from a 'rebuilding team'. At that point, the market takes over.

I don't think anyone is going to be happy with the outcome to all this. Were I running a team with an interest, Stanton's obduracy would make me less enthusiastic about trading for him.
   12. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: December 08, 2017 at 01:07 PM (#5588821)

I don't think anyone is going to be happy with the outcome to all this. Were I running a team with an interest, Stanton's obduracy would make me less enthusiastic about trading for him.


That may have an impact on the happiness of the Marlins and teams trying to acquire Stanton. I think there's a pretty good chance that Stanton's path to a happy outcome involves maximum obduracy.
   13. Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington Posted: December 08, 2017 at 01:11 PM (#5588824)
Dude has a contract. The Marlins don't want to honor their part of it. They agreed to give him a no-trade clause, they have no right to complain that he's using it to end up somewhere he wants to go (considering he signed the 12 year deal or whatever in the first place, he has every right to not want to move at all).

I think the fact that Stanton gave meetings to the Giants and Cardinals is a point in his favor. He probably never wanted to go to either place, but was open to being convinced. He wasn't, so here we are.
   14. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: December 08, 2017 at 01:23 PM (#5588832)
So I guess the Cardinals didn't finish second in the bidding after all. More like sixth.

That was Seattle.
   15. ??'s Biggest Fan! Posted: December 08, 2017 at 01:31 PM (#5588843)
Can any player be worth the amount of money still left on Stanton's contract? I mean, it seems like you'd have to be a rich man's version of Mike Trout for the next 800-900 games to justify taking on the salary and giving up the cost-controlled and high ceiling prospects to make this work.
   16. G. Bostock Posted: December 08, 2017 at 01:34 PM (#5588846)
Dude has a contract he signed during the 2014/15 off-season, when Jose Fernandez looked like helping the Marlins be a contender for a few years to come, and then he could opt-out if things didn't turn out well (or very well).

Now new owners say 'we're going to rebuild' and that wasn't in the picture when he signed the deal. So he says so. And it suits the new owners to trade him. Both sides potentially can secure advantage from a successful arrangement.

Now, the thing is, if Stanton is serious about his self-proclaimed desire to compete for a ring, it's to his advantage to move. If he just wants to build himself a money-bin, he can stick with losing in Miami. I know which Stanton I'd prefer to trade for.

I'll wager a small sum the Cardinals may feel they dodged a bullet here.

Verlander was in the same boat, and now he can admire that nice ring he'll be getting. Verlander is the kind of played I'd trade for.
   17. Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington Posted: December 08, 2017 at 01:57 PM (#5588867)
People were giving Verlander #### too, undeservedly so IMO, until he accepted the trade. He too, supposedly had a list of preferred teams. Then he changed his mind when he was convinced it was a good move for him. Had he rejected that, perhaps because he wanted more time to make a decision, is something I never would think to hold against him.

The fact that Stanton's list that's now leaked out includes 4 very successful, and likely to continue being successful, teams pretty strongly suggests to me that he does indeed want to win. Rejecting a trade to the Giants does the same thing for me, considering the likely sorry state they're in. The Cards, I dunno know, but I'll never hold it against someone not wanting to play in St. Louis.

If he were to reject a trade to a clear good team, you might begin to have a point.
   18. Blastin Posted: December 08, 2017 at 02:05 PM (#5588879)
What? Are you saying you wouldn't trade for him if he... doesn't agree to be traded to a contender?
   19. djordan Posted: December 08, 2017 at 02:23 PM (#5588893)
There's the straight-forward manner of basic negotiations and then there's reality.

How did Jeter or anyone in the prospective ownership team not have a back-channel dinner/drinks with Stanton's agent before the purchase? They really should've known his wishes before they placed their bid. Obviously, this is a huge debt obligation.

For a guy "in the business" since 1993 and high-level, deep-pockted moneymen behind him, the new ownership is really coming across like a bunch of rubes.
   20. TDF didn't lie, he just didn't remember Posted: December 08, 2017 at 02:38 PM (#5588900)
Can any player be worth the amount of money still left on Stanton's contract? I mean, it seems like you'd have to be a rich man's version of Mike Trout for the next 800-900 games to justify taking on the salary and giving up the cost-controlled and high ceiling prospects to make this work.
I don't think there's any way the Marlins get both complete salary relief and cost-controlled, high-ceiling prospects. But to directly answer - probably, yes a player can be worth what Stanton's still owed.

He's about to enter his age-28 season, and has 10/$295 left on his contract. As a for example, for example Votto was 28 in '12; since then, according to Fangraphs, he's been worth $243M over 6 seasons. That would leave a 4/$50M contract to break even.

Now, that doesn't address three things - (1) the value of the prospects you'd have to give up, (2) the value of the opt-out clause, and (3) Joey Votto is a god. But again - Miami isn't getting 100% salary relief and top prospects, so that mitigates (1) and (2).
   21. Infinite Yost (Voxter) Posted: December 08, 2017 at 02:51 PM (#5588916)
It is kind of amazing to think about that Astros offense PLUS Stanton. Though they'd probably have to play Springer in center more than you'd really want to. Small price to pay.
   22. The Honorable Ardo Posted: December 08, 2017 at 04:17 PM (#5589012)
A Stanton trade makes sense for the Cubs (especially now that they aren't getting Ohtani), though they'd need a 3rd team willing to absorb salary to make it work:

Cubs get Stanton and J.T. Riddle (they need a backup SS)
Team 3 gets Ian Happ and Jason Heyward
Marlins get top prospects from Team 3, similar to the Tigers' return for Verlander

Then you could go Bryant/Rizzo/Stanton/Schwarber in the middle of the order, which is truly scary.
   23. Tony S Posted: December 08, 2017 at 05:05 PM (#5589037)

The one issue with Stanton on the Astros (the Astros are now regarded as a destination franchise!) is that he'd be replacing their only good lefthanded bat in Josh Reddick. Now obviously Stanton is a better hitter than Reddick, but a lineup that lists too hard one way can be vulnerable against a good team. They did get by with it this past October.

So when the Marlins go 58-104 next year and draw 900,000 fans, are we going to blame the Miami fans again for non-support?
   24. TDF didn't lie, he just didn't remember Posted: December 08, 2017 at 05:19 PM (#5589044)
The one issue with Stanton on the Astros (the Astros are now regarded as a destination franchise!) is that he'd be replacing their only good lefthanded bat in Josh Reddick. Now obviously Stanton is a better hitter than Reddick, but a lineup that lists too hard one way can be vulnerable against a good team. They did get by with it this past October.
Carlos Beltran retired, so you have 4 outfielders who can rotate through the OF+DH.
   25. Sleepy's not going to blame himself Posted: December 08, 2017 at 05:47 PM (#5589063)
Team 3 gets Ian Happ and Jason Heyward
Marlins get top prospects from Team 3, similar to the Tigers' return for Verlander
Who is this mythical "team 3", who wants to give up prospects AND take on Heyward's salary, in exchange for Ian Happ?

But yeah, that would be a great deal for the Cubs.
   26. Walt Davis Posted: December 08, 2017 at 06:03 PM (#5589071)
In the supposed Giants deal, the Marlins were picking up something like $50 M and getting the Giants' top 4 prospects but none of them were very good (one guy mid-50s, the other three not in the top 100). The Cards were supposedly offering better prospects and to eat more salary but obviously Stanton isn't too keen on going there (although he probably should be).

Can any player be worth Stanton's contract? Of course. ZiPS projects him to something in the range of 35-40 WAR which is worth at least $295 and maybe as much as $400 over the next 10 years. And with about 25 of that WAR coming over the next 4 years, Stanton might opt out in which case the team just got a massive bargain. That said, ZiPS seemed optimistic to me and I suspect somewhere around $250-270 is about right (and the Giants seem to have agreed with me). As I've noted before, Miami back-loaded this contract substantially, getting a huge bargain over the first three years. Essentially the $25 M plus $10 M option buyout for his age 37 season is the deferred payment for that early bargain. The acquiring team can't obtain that past excess value but they can try to make the Marlins pick up the deferred payment for it (structured however over the next 10 years). That would put him at 10/$260 which sounds about right.

The only real concern about the original contract was his health and durability and that's still the only real concern. But if the next 4-5 years are healthy ones, you're satisfied and any production he gives you after that is gravy. But it could go the Cano route. That deal looked fine as long as he gave you about 20 WAR in the first 3 years ... then you'd hope he'd have a couple of Whitaker years, then who cares. Alas, he had Whitaker year in year 2 (and year 4). They really wanted to have 23-24 WAR by now, instead it's 20. Still far from a disaster and he's probably still got at least 5-6 WAR left in him and maybe many more.
   27. Walt Davis Posted: December 08, 2017 at 06:26 PM (#5589080)
#2 ... heck, we can throw in the Cubs' top 4 prospects too!

#22 ... it's hard to see what team 3 gets out of that. Happ isn't worth Heyward's contract (or at least he hasn't established yet that he is) so that's already a negative deal for them. Maybe something like the Giants deal ... Cubs get Stanton and $50 M from Marlins; team 3 gets Happ, Heyward and $67 M from Cubs (half what Heyward's owed in salary ... Cubs also picking up all the deferred bonus payments); Marlins get some prospects from both teams (Cubs don't really have any good ones, maybe team 3 throws in a #50ish).

So team 3 gets Happ and Heyward on a 6/$67 contract for a #50ish prospect and maybe a lower prospect. Cubs payroll over the next 10 years is $180 higher than it would have been if they stood pat. (I think I did that right.) Marlins get roughly the same package as agreed with the Giants with the best prospect coming from team 3 and at least 2 of the Cubs' top 4.
   28. Jeff Frances the Mute Posted: December 08, 2017 at 07:22 PM (#5589094)
I assumed #22 was a joke.
   29. Rowland Office Supplies Posted: December 08, 2017 at 07:40 PM (#5589095)
"...none of them were very good (one guy mid-50s..."

Rafael Palmeiro?
   30. Srul Itza Posted: December 08, 2017 at 08:33 PM (#5589113)
If he just wants to build himself a money-bin, he can stick with losing in Miami. I know which Stanton I'd prefer to trade for.


I don't understand this. It is not STANTON who will be giving up money if he moves; it is Miami or the team that gets him.

Stanton has already built his money-bin. The money is already there, and guaranteed (although there will be a State income tax hit unless he goes to Houston).

   31. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 08, 2017 at 10:13 PM (#5589138)
If I'm the Yankees or Dodgers, I offer a nothing burger package of prospects (a B- and 3 Cs), and insist the Marlins eat $100M, where the $100M is owed even if Stanton opts out. And I don't budge from that.

Neither team needs Stanton. Might as well try and get him on an actually favorable deal. Either would be insane to take his full salary given their luxury tax situation.

That $290M could cost them $450M.
   32. The Yankee Clapper Posted: December 09, 2017 at 12:36 AM (#5589151)
Sources are saying that the Yankees & Marlins are talking about a Stanton deal:
Stanton is owed $295 million over the next 10 years, and any trade would be complicated for the Yankees, who would like to include Jacoby Ellsbury. The center fielder is owed about $68.4 million through 2020, and like Stanton, he has a full no-trade clause.
. . .
But as Stanton's control of the process has manifested through his no-trade clause, killing the potential for deals with the San Francisco Giants, St. Louis Cardinals and other teams, the Yankees and Marlins re-engaged in talks earlier this week.

Not entirely clear how serious this is. Could be leaked to get the Dodgers (or others) to up their offer. It'd be tougher for the Yanks to get under the luxury tax threshold with Stanton, but possible if Ellsbury goes and no one expensive is added. Judge & Stanton in the same line-up would be be something.
   33. Ben Broussard Ramjet Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:25 AM (#5589153)
One rumor I saw suggested Castro might be on his way back, which might make a little sense, unless the Marlins have a 2B-ready replacement for Gordon. Castro's making about $10m/year at present, I think, and seems likely to be under pressure from Torres pretty soon in the Yankees' lineup. Plus he should have no NTC and his contract only has a couple more years to run. But it's not clear that Torres would be fully ready for Opening Day after his injury this year, so the risk of a Brian Roberts-type temporary replacement would be there.

That should make Stanton effectively $15m-$20m/year or so until 2020, letting the Yankees dip under the luxury tax threshold more easily, although making room for CC might complicate that, and they wouldn't have much headroom for other moves now or within-season. Maybe a salary dump for Ellsbury could free up a little more.
   34. PreservedFish Posted: December 09, 2017 at 07:14 AM (#5589156)
If I'm the Yankees or Dodgers, I offer a nothing burger package of prospects (a B- and 3 Cs), and insist the Marlins eat $100M, where the $100M is owed even if Stanton opts out. And I don't budge from that.


You think the fish are that desperate?
   35. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:04 AM (#5589159)
(34) Don't know, but that's the beauty of having no need to make the deal. The Yankees and Dodgers can hold out for a steal or nothing. Let Miami walk away..
   36. Jim Furtado Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:08 AM (#5589160)
If I'm the Yankees or Dodgers, I offer a nothing burger package of prospects (a B- and 3 Cs), and insist the Marlins eat $100M, where the $100M is owed even if Stanton opts out. And I don't budge from that.

Neither team needs Stanton. Might as well try and get him on an actually favorable deal. Either would be insane to take his full salary given their luxury tax situation.

That $290M could cost them $450M.

When teams include cash the cash goes upfront. The payment can't be spread out over future years.
   37. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:13 AM (#5589163)
(34) Don't know, but that's the beauty of having no need to make the deal. The Yankees and Dodgers can hold out for a steal or nothing. Let Miami walk away..


The problem with that theory is that you re talking about 2 teams, not 1. The package you describe wold be a real coup if a tam were to get it. So the other team thinks "Well, we could offer a little more and it still would be a good deal." So the other team thinks "Well, we could offer even more and it still would work out." And so on until you reach a theoretically fair deal. So you're right, neither team is desperate, but neither team would want to let a potential good deal slip away on principle.
   38. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:17 AM (#5589164)
When teams include cash the cash goes upfront. The payment can't be spread out over future years.


So when you look at team payroll at BBREF and see for example that the Rangers are credited $6 mil/year from 2018-2020 for Prince Fielder, that the Tigers aren't paying that every year to Fielder, but they paid the full amount to the Rangers at the time of the trade, and that's just Sean's way of accounting for it?

   39. McCoy Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:22 AM (#5589166)
Don't think that is right. The rangers got out from under arod's contract when he opted out.
   40. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:44 AM (#5589171)
If I'm the Yankees or Dodgers, I offer a nothing burger package of prospects (a B- and 3 Cs), and insist the Marlins eat $100M, where the $100M is owed even if Stanton opts out. And I don't budge from that.

You think the fish are that desperate?

Don't know the answer to that, and I don't really want the Yankees to give up prime prospects or go over the luxury tax threshold when they've already got so many young and inexpensive potential stars under contract.

But if somehow the Yanks wound up getting Stanton via one of snapper's nothing burger packages, the best part might be the howlings of conspiracy theorists who'd claim that the Yankees planted Jeter in Miami in order to make the Marlins into the 21st century version of the Kansas City A's.

And don't think that sort of reaction couldn't happen. It might even happen around here.

Hey, you've still got tens of millions of birthers and truthers out there. And conspiracy theories aren't always political in nature.

EDIT: OMG, I didn't see that other thread until just now. And check out the very first comment on it:
After over years 20 years of love-making, Jeter’s gift basket to the bleacher creatures is truly generous.




   41. Tony S Posted: December 09, 2017 at 09:01 AM (#5589176)

I don't think the Marlins are that desperate, but they ARE that poorly run.

This new ownership group makes Loria look like Ewing Kauffman.
   42. G. Bostock Posted: December 09, 2017 at 11:42 AM (#5589236)
This new ownership group makes Loria look like Ewing Kauffman.

This is something I saw coming. (See Stanton-to-Yankees thread for what this refers to.)

Mr Loria was not simply a Jeff Koons' installation satirising a Welfare Queen. He liked winning, but only on the cheap.
   43. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: December 09, 2017 at 12:54 PM (#5589274)
So when you look at team payroll at BBREF and see for example that the Rangers are credited $6 mil/year from 2018-2020 for Prince Fielder, that the Tigers aren't paying that every year to Fielder, but they paid the full amount to the Rangers at the time of the trade, and that's just Sean's way of accounting for it?

I think the upfront payments are for when teams make trades of players for "cash considerations". But typically those are fairly nominal amounts. There is no way the commissioner's office is going to approve $100m player sale. That is orders of magnitudes higher than anything that has ever been done.

Picking up a player's salary, is picking up their salary (i.e. continuing to pay it when it is due). But the most the Marlins could pick up pre opt-out is what Stanton is due until then, which is about $75m I think. Even that would need approval obviously, which could be dicey.

But either way would seem to be a complete non-starter for the Marlins, since the imperative for them is to cut costs in the immediate future. Neither proposal would do so. Nor can I see them taking on Ellsbury, who only makes a few million less that Stanton over the next few years, unless the Yankees are the ones kicking in a large chunk of money.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
aleskel
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOMNICHATTER for the weekend of July 21-22, 2018
(106 - 3:57am, Jul 22)
Last: GGIAS (aka Poster Nutbag)

NewsblogOTP 2018 July 16: Why Does President Trump Balk At Attending Baseball Games?
(1355 - 2:03am, Jul 22)
Last: Jess Franco

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 7-20-2018
(24 - 12:46am, Jul 22)
Last: bobm

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (let's call it July 2018)
(616 - 12:24am, Jul 22)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogAgent: Mets should trade Jacob deGrom if not interested in long-term deal
(12 - 11:58pm, Jul 21)
Last: Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb

NewsblogBaseball Is The Most Listened To Sport On Radio
(28 - 11:10pm, Jul 21)
Last: Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams)

Hall of Merit2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(129 - 9:44pm, Jul 21)
Last: Kiko Sakata

NewsblogOT - 2018 NBA Summer Potpourri (finals, draft, free agency, Colangelo dragging)
(3555 - 9:25pm, Jul 21)
Last: SPICEY WITH A SIDE OF BEER ON A BABYYYYYYY

NewsblogJack White’s Bat Inducted Into Baseball Hall Of Fame
(6 - 8:37pm, Jul 21)
Last: QLE

Gonfalon CubsLooking Forward
(45 - 7:45pm, Jul 21)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (World Cup)
(3268 - 7:32pm, Jul 21)
Last: The_Ex

NewsblogNow in Living Color: Ted Williams’s Last Game
(30 - 2:40pm, Jul 21)
Last: Morty Causa

Newsblog14 minutes of sound footage from the April 1931 Yankees-Red Sox season opener (YouTube)
(27 - 8:24am, Jul 21)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogStop! Collaborate and OMNICHATTER! for Friday, July 20, 2018.
(66 - 1:47am, Jul 21)
Last: Perry

NewsblogRob Manfred: Mike Trout limits his popularity because he won't market himself
(95 - 10:52pm, Jul 20)
Last: NJ in NY (Now with Baby!)

Page rendered in 0.3910 seconds
46 querie(s) executed