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

Saturday, December 09, 2017

Yankees in talks on Giancarlo Stanton trade

Dave Dombrowski will not have a good morning.

And Joel Sherman never sleeps.

Jim Furtado Posted: December 09, 2017 at 07:27 AM | 198 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: giancarlo stanton, marlins, yankees

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.

Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:02 PM (#5589352)
Jeter's nicest gift basket ever.
   102. Batman Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:10 PM (#5589355)
They kept trading away their good young talent (Ruppert Jones, Mark Langston,
The Langston trade worked out pretty well.
   103. The Duke Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:10 PM (#5589356)
Stanton probably:

1. Got paid a bonus for his NTC clUse to go
2. He probably got grossed up for all the state taxes he will pay in NY vs Miami

I expect both of these were very large numbers - maybe about the $35 million that went to the Yankees.
   104. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:15 PM (#5589358)
NYS tax on roughly half of the remainder of the contract is about $13M. The opt-out would change things of course. Too lazy to try to figure all the tax implications of changing leagues.
   105. Nasty Nate Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:19 PM (#5589361)
Stanton probably got only to pick his team in exchange for waiving his NTC.

Has any player in history been paid tens of millions of dollars to agree to a trade?
   106. shoewizard Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:23 PM (#5589363)
I have to think that the Dodgers, (not the Cubs) are the front runners to sign Bryce Harper. They have a ton of guaranteed money coming off the books after 2018. I also think Harper will prefer west coast.

Their current estimated payroll commitments (Guaranteed + Arb + other). luxury tax number in parenthesis

2018 215M (197)
2019 155M (206)
2020 134M (208)
2021.. 95M (210)
2022.. 82M
2023.. 74M

bb-ref LAD contracts page

wiki luxury tax page

Looks to me they will be able to sign Harper, extend Bellinger and Seager, and still remain comfortably below the luxury tax threshold.

OR, their other option is to sign Machado, move Turner who is signed through 2020 to first, and Bellinger back to OF full time.

Either way, one of Harper or Machado seems like at least 50% chance of being a Dodger.

Which sucks for me......

   107. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:28 PM (#5589365)
Sure, and you could also have said it about lots of other teams, like the Orioles when Angelos was sticking his nose into everything, or the A's going back to their time in Philadelphia. But you'd think that when it comes to placing expansion teams into areas with questionable demographics and knowing nothing but Spring training ticket prices, the other owners might have been a bit more careful about those to whom they were granting franchises, both about their financial situation AND their willingness to spend the money that's necessary to field a competitive team. It's hard to believe that they did that in the case of the Marlins.

But that's a reflection on the owners, not on the actual cities or markets. The expansion Seattle Mariners were put in a metro area hemmed in by the ocean on one side, the Cascades on the other, and an international border to the north. They suffered awful ownership in their early years (I'm sure you remember George Argyros), the team lost big, and their attendance was lousy. They kept trading away their good young talent (Ruppert Jones, Mark Langston, etc.) There was plenty of talk about how Seattle was "not a viable baseball market". But they eventually got some competent ownership, DIDN'T trade Ken Griffey as soon as his salary matured, and finally enjoyed a strong playoff run in 1995 -- at which point local interest in the team and attendance exploded. Even with the franchise mired in mediocrity over the last decade, attendance remains reasonable, and the Mariners are ingrained in the local culture.


It also didn't hurt that Seattle's been in a boom economy and they've got one of the best parks in baseball.

The Padres, in a corner of the country like the Mariners and Marlins, haven't been a huge on-field success throughout most of their history, but after an early bout with bad ownership that almost got the team moved to Washington, the franchise stabilized, improved, and remains an integral part of the community's identity. The current team management seems to have its act together. Nobody's talking about relocating the team.

There's no reason the Marlins can't do the same. But they've NEVER had decent ownership, and continue not to, and until that's the case it's still fair to say we don't really know if Miami can support a baseball team or not. It's analogous to a state government chronically underfunding public schools, and when the schools predictably struggle pointing at them and claiming that this proves public education doesn't work.


That's a reasonable analogy, but my point was why didn't baseball's other owners vet those prospective Marlins owners a lot more carefully before granting them a franchise? To continue your political comparison, it's as if the Democrats had nominated Rudy Giuliani to be the next governorship of Massachusetts.
   108. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:31 PM (#5589367)
Has any player in history been paid tens of millions of dollars to agree to a trade?


I'm guessing yes, but only if you count contract extensions.
   109. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:33 PM (#5589368)
But you'd think that when it comes to placing expansion teams into areas with questionable demographics and knowing nothing but Spring training ticket prices, the other owners might have been a bit more careful about those to whom they were granting franchises, both about their financial situation AND their willingness to spend the money that's necessary to field a competitive team. It's hard to believe that they did that in the case of the Marlins.

You're talking about the owners of MLB teams in the last 30 years or some other, less cheapskate and pound-foolish group of wealthy men?


I'm talking about a group of owners who wouldn't have wanted to be saddled with a pair of franchises that in terms of attendance have been the baseball equivalents of the Ottoman Empire. Which is another way of saying that your response was spot on.
   110. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:33 PM (#5589369)
Has any player in history been paid tens of millions of dollars to agree to a trade?

Players have been able to get their option year guaranteed in return for waiving 10/5 or NTC.
   111. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: December 09, 2017 at 03:41 PM (#5589371)
Has any player in history been paid tens of millions of dollars to agree to a trade?

The acquiring team being forced to exercise a team option as a condition of the trade has been pretty standard, no? Granted the team gets something out of that too, but in some cases that would have been worth tens of millions.

There also haven't been too many trades where a player still has 10/11 years left on his contract...
   112. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: December 09, 2017 at 04:01 PM (#5589375)
So according to Sherman, the part of Stanton's contract that the Marlins agreed to eat is all post-opt out, but still reduces the portion of his AAV that counts toward the Yankees' luxury tax limit.
   113. eddieot Posted: December 09, 2017 at 04:09 PM (#5589377)
The most important question: what does Austin Romine get for giving up #27?
   114. Tony S Posted: December 09, 2017 at 04:15 PM (#5589379)
So according to Sherman, the part of Stanton's contract that the Marlins agreed to eat it all post-opt out, but still reduces the portion of his AAV that counts toward the Yankees' luxury tax limit.


Well, I can certainly see now why the Marlins couldn't have gotten the Cubs to beat THAT offer from the Yankees. </s>
   115. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: December 09, 2017 at 04:15 PM (#5589380)
A gift basket. Duh.
   116. Endless Trash Posted: December 09, 2017 at 04:38 PM (#5589382)
I don't believe in conspiracy theories, but the optics on this are pretty ####### terrible.
   117. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 09, 2017 at 04:54 PM (#5589385)
How so?
   118. Greg K Posted: December 09, 2017 at 04:55 PM (#5589387)
I skimmed through the last page, but I guess I wasn't thorough enough.

What exactly is the conspiracy theory?
   119. Tom Nawrocki Posted: December 09, 2017 at 05:09 PM (#5589392)
Has anyone ever been traded immediately following an MVP season? I know R.A. Dickey was traded after winning the Cy Young award.
   120. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: December 09, 2017 at 05:11 PM (#5589393)
Eddie Collins, 1914
Alex Rodriguez, 2005
   121. Walt Davis Posted: December 09, 2017 at 05:16 PM (#5589395)
I'm not sure why folks are surprised at the package -- tooting my own horn (you should try it), I've been saying all along that the Marlins would likely have to eat money while still getting little of value in return. The supposed Giants package wasn't substantially different than this. The $35 M post-optout (if that ends up being correct) is a perfect fit for what I've been saying -- the age 37 guaranteed year plus $10 M buyout ($35 M total) was the deferred payment for the massive bargain he gave them in salary the first 3 years so there was no "sense" for the acquiring team to pay that. Making it post-optout fits nicely as the Marlins will only have to pay it if the Yankees end up owing it.

Although my team paid the price in some of this, it's an interesting set of transactions:

Yanks get Castro for Adam Warren
Yanks trade Chapman for Torres ... and Warren. Torres is Castro's obvious resplacement.
Yanks sign Chapman
Yanks trade Castro for Stanton

The Yanks got 2 years of Castro, Torres and Stanton for ... half-a-season of Warren and half-a-season of Chapman ... without actually losing Warren or Chapman. Sure, sure, they're also paying 100s of millions along the way but that's some quality GMing there.

I suppose I'm happy that Stanton ended up in the AL rather than the Cards/Giants/Dodgers. Also for the pure baseball fan in me, now he'll have the option of shifting to DH as he ages and maybe keep the bat going an extra year or two.

EDIT: Also Ohtani and Stanton to AL is pushing the league differential back up.
   122. PreservedFish Posted: December 09, 2017 at 05:17 PM (#5589396)
Greg - that Jeter gave his old (and still favorite) team a sweetheart deal.
   123. Greg K Posted: December 09, 2017 at 05:41 PM (#5589399)
Greg - that Jeter gave his old (and still favorite) team a sweetheart deal.

Ah, I follow. Thanks.
   124. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 09, 2017 at 05:45 PM (#5589400)
Also something about George Soros.
   125. ptodd Posted: December 09, 2017 at 05:56 PM (#5589401)
So Jeter is the modern John McGraw who helped loot the Orioles on behalf of the Giants and then spent the next 30 yrs with the Giants (Jeter did his time with the Yankees upfront). Orioles closed down and moved to NY and later became the Yankees. AL President at the time had wanted a team in NY so coincidentally the looting helped him get his wish. Ban Johnson was the AL President and he saw a strong NY team as essential to the AL's ability to compete with the NL and over the years strong armed AL owners to feed NY good players at little cost. Didn't help much till the Red Sox fed them Babe Ruth. Maybe Manfred playing a role behind the scenes because the last 3 -4!years have seen them get some sweet heart deals (posting fee rules change helped them get Tanaka, Didi, Chapman, Castro, Gray, Stanton, Arod suspension)
   126. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 09, 2017 at 05:59 PM (#5589403)
"PS I am not a crackpot."
   127. Captain Supporter Posted: December 09, 2017 at 06:14 PM (#5589407)
Take a deep breath, ptodd. That kind of remark belongs on Twitter.
   128. Srul Itza Posted: December 09, 2017 at 06:14 PM (#5589408)
tooting my own horn (you should try it)


There is no way in hell I am tooting your horn.
   129. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: December 09, 2017 at 06:25 PM (#5589409)
So Jeter is the modern John McGraw


McGraw banged his way through the entire Ford Model T catalogue.
   130. Stevey Posted: December 09, 2017 at 07:08 PM (#5589418)
he stays flexible and takes any opportunity to add elite talent


Yeah, I'm sure Cashman is the main reason that his team can take on $250M at the drop of a hat. If only some place like Cleveland had Cashman running the team, they would instead be awash in high salary stars.
   131. catomi01 Posted: December 09, 2017 at 07:11 PM (#5589419)
What's the next move as the Yankees? You now have Stanton, Judge, Hicks, Gardner, Ellsbury, and Clint Frazier for the OF and DH - plus they probably want to be able to use the DH spot for Sanchez once a week or so. Obviously you'd like to trade Ellsbury to clear some salary, but do you try to flip Frazier or Hicks for a 2B/3B (with Torres and Wade battling for the other spot in spring training?) or a starting pitcher?
   132. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 09, 2017 at 07:18 PM (#5589423)
do you try to flip Frazier or Hicks for a 2B/3B (with Torres and Wade battling for the other spot in spring training?) or a starting pitcher?

Given that Miguel Andujar is also going to be available as a utility infielder after playing very well last year before his injury, I'd say that starting pitching is going to be the far bigger need.
   133. The Yankee Clapper Posted: December 09, 2017 at 07:34 PM (#5589425)
What's the next move as the Yankees? You now have Stanton, Judge, Hicks, Gardner, Ellsbury, and Clint Frazier for the OF and DH - plus they probably want to be able to use the DH spot for Sanchez once a week or so. Obviously you'd like to trade Ellsbury to clear some salary, but do you try to flip Frazier or Hicks for a 2B/3B (with Torres and Wade battling for the other spot in spring training?) or a starting pitcher?

Ellsbury doesn't bring back much, and the Yankees would have to eat a lot of salary, but if they can make a deal, they will, IMHO I suspect they just go with Torres at 2nd, so no need for a deal there. Let Headley play out his contract at 3rd with Andujar in the wings if Headley doesn't cut it. The Yanks have enough luxury tax room to sign Sabathia to a relatively modest 1-year contract, which lets them keep Frazier & other farm system assets rather than trading for pitching. Frazier may spend a bit more time in the minors than he needs, but I don't think they'll be in a hurry to trade him. He could move ahead of Hicks within a year or two, or even be traded when there is a more pressing need.
   134. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:05 PM (#5589428)
Ellsbury doesn't bring back much, and the Yankees would have to eat a lot of salary, but if they can make a deal, they will, IMHO I suspect they just go with Torres at 2nd, so no need for a deal there. Let Headley play out his contract at 3rd with Andujar in the wings if Headley doesn't cut it. The Yanks have enough luxury tax room to sign Sabathia to a relatively modest 1-year contract, which lets them keep Frazier & other farm system assets rather than trading for pitching. Frazier may spend a bit more time in the minors than he needs, but I don't think they'll be in a hurry to trade him. He could move ahead of Hicks within a year or two, or even be traded when there is a more pressing need.

That makes sense to me. I'm not confident in Hicks being the guy we saw last year, and he's very injury prone. Torres gets 2B, with Wade and Torreyes as a stop gap if he's not fully healthy or playing well in spring. Agree on Sabathia.

The team looks something like:

CF/DH Gardner
RF Judge
1B Bird
LF Stanton
C Sanchez
SS Gregorius
3B Headley
DH/CF Hicks/Ellsbury
2B Torres

SP1 Severino
SP2 Tanaka
SP3 Gray
SP4 Sabathia
SP5 Montgomery
SP6 Adams

CL Chapman
SU Robertson
SU Kahnle
LR Green
LR Warren
Mop-up (or better yet traded) Betances

That plays just fine. No need for any more acquisitions.
   135. eric Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:07 PM (#5589429)
What's the next move as the Yankees? You now have Stanton, Judge, Hicks, Gardner, Ellsbury, and Clint Frazier for the OF and DH - plus they probably want to be able to use the DH spot for Sanchez once a week or so. Obviously you'd like to trade Ellsbury to clear some salary, but do you try to flip Frazier or Hicks for a 2B/3B (with Torres and Wade battling for the other spot in spring training?) or a starting pitcher?


Rumor mill has Hicks about to agree to a five-year deal. I think with that situation, you start Stanton, Gardner, Judge and Hicks among the OF/DH spots, you deal Frazier for something you need (starting pitching), and you unload Ellsbury however you have to. Hicks is an ideal fourth outfielder who can handle CF fine (or even very well) and can hit a little if last season wasn't a fluke.

If you have to keep Ellsbury, it isn't the end of the world. He's an adequate player (with a stratospheric salary) and having five competent-to-MVP caliber outfielders isn't the worst situation to be in, especially when you have the DH spot and at least one of the five is likely to miss a decent chunk of time with an injury (and the rest will get banged up to various degrees as the season progresses).
   136. Captain Supporter Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:17 PM (#5589431)
Giving a 5 year deal to Hicks would be crazy. He has had exactly 1/2 of a good season in his career. But Frazier indeed has just become trade bait.
   137. RMc's Unenviable Situation Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:22 PM (#5589433)
It's nice to know that small-market teams like the Yankees and the Angels can still get good players!
   138. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:36 PM (#5589434)
Given that Miguel Andujar is also going to be available as a utility infielder after playing very well last year before his injury, I'd say that starting pitching is going to be the far bigger need


Andujar is a bar-first 3B, I don’t think anyone in the organization projects him as someone who can play up the middle. Tyler Wade is the in-house utility prospect.
   139. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 09, 2017 at 08:59 PM (#5589438)
The team looks something like:

CF/DH Gardner
RF Judge
1B Bird
LF Stanton
C Sanchez
SS Gregorius
3B Headley
DH/CF Hicks/Ellsbury
2B Torres


You're assuming that Todd Frazier leaves, but what are you figuring for Clint? AAA for more seasoning?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Andujar is a bar-first 3B, I don’t think anyone in the organization projects him as someone who can play up the middle. Tyler Wade is the in-house utility prospect.

That's not what I remember hearing from the announcers when he returned to the Yanks for that last Toronto series. I know he's been a third baseman in the minors, but he'll be only 23 in March and I doubt if his positioning is set in stone. He wouldn't be the first player to make such an adjustment, and he's got more pop than Wade.

   140. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: December 09, 2017 at 09:02 PM (#5589440)
The most important question: what does Austin Romine get for giving up #27?

Pretty sure Romine is more concerned about making the team than one what uniform number he has.

A 49 OPS+ in 2017, 54 OPS+ career. He has to be among the worst players to ever start at 1B, no?
   141. rconn23 Posted: December 09, 2017 at 09:19 PM (#5589442)
Rumor mill says Hicks is getting a 5-year deal? I haven't heard that at all. Source?

Resign CC, that's priority No. 1. I expect a trade is going to happen. They aren't going to have Ellsbury as a 5th outfielder. And since to trade him they would have to eat most or all of his contract, they will probably trade Gardner or Frazier for pitching. I'm not a fan of that, but no one is taking Ells on that contract with the possible exception of ... Seattle.
   142. Count Vorror Rairol Mencoon (CoB) Posted: December 09, 2017 at 09:25 PM (#5589443)
That's not what I remember hearing from the announcers when he returned to the Yanks for that last Toronto series. I know he's been a third baseman in the minors, but he'll be only 23 in March and I doubt if his positioning is set in stone. He wouldn't be the first player to make such an adjustment, and he's got more pop than Wad


The Yankees kept Andujar down to work on his defense at 3rd. They're not about to move him *up* the defensive spectrum ...

   143. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 09, 2017 at 09:33 PM (#5589446)
That's not what I remember hearing from the announcers when he returned to the Yanks for that last Toronto series. I know he's been a third baseman in the minors, but he'll be only 23 in March and I doubt if his positioning is set in stone. He wouldn't be the first player to make such an adjustment, and he's got more pop than Wade.

The Yankees kept Andujar down to work on his defense at 3rd. They're not about to move him *up* the defensive spectrum ...


I'll bow to your apparent greater knowledge about this, though I'm almost certain heard those comments several times by members of the YES team.
   144. ReggieThomasLives Posted: December 09, 2017 at 09:57 PM (#5589449)
Just confirms my original thought that the Stanton contract was a bad deal for Marlins. Loria thought the heavy backloading meant they’d have him cheap while dumping his worst years on another team. But instead, immediately after hitting 59 home runs in his best season yet at age 27, they already had to eat $35M (the Cardinals were demanding $50M).

Imagine if they waited till next off season and Stanton had an off 2018, would the Marlins been forced to eat $100M?
   145. Walt Davis Posted: December 09, 2017 at 10:03 PM (#5589450)
You're assuming that Todd Frazier leaves

Have they made him an offer?

If anybody gets traded, I'll guess Gardner. He's very good on a good contract with one year and an option left so he'll bring back pretty good value (either something useful now or prospects). But obviously, he'd be nice to keep and they can walk away in a year if they want to. But a trade would put a Hicks/Ellsbury platoon in CF and make it a lot easier to give Frazier some ML playing time.

Unless Hicks is signing for 5/$15 total, or some such, signing him for that many years is a bad idea.

I know Bird has looked fine so far but if I'm the Yanks I'm also thinking of whether Stanton or Judge can make the transition to 1B. Both are huge guys who aren't likely to retain positive defensive value -- not that either is close to needing moving yet. To an extent, the Yanks have to choose who they think the better player is -- Frazier or Bird -- then figure out the marginal information that might affect which gets traded.

Still, the DH can solve many "we have too many good players" problems. Given his fragile history, it probably makes sense to stick Stanton there 1-2 games a week. Add one for Judge (just cuz), 1-2 for Frazier, one for Sanchez. Without Gardner, something like:

Frazier: 50 starts in LF, 25 each in RF and DH
Stanton: 100 in LF (?), 50 at DH
Judge: 125 in RF, 25 at DH
Sanchez: 100-120 at C, 20-40 at DH (1B on Bird rest days?)
Hicks/Ellsbury: split CF plus most of the remaining LF/RF/DH starts

I know it was just a fluke of where the games were when he was healthy but how about those H/R splits of Bird last year:

237/345/548, 894 OPS at home
111/183/204, 387 OPS on road
   146. APNY Posted: December 09, 2017 at 10:27 PM (#5589455)
Does Frazier/Adams and a couple of lower prospects get you Archer? What pitchers are supposedly available?
   147. Count Vorror Rairol Mencoon (CoB) Posted: December 09, 2017 at 10:29 PM (#5589456)
Have they made him an offer?


No.

And given Headley's existence on the roster, they're unlikely to.

You're most likely right about who the obvious OF trade candidate is, but I'm going to have a massive sadz if Ellsbury is on the roster next year and GGBG isn't. He and The Hammer are my two favorite Yankees.
   148. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 09, 2017 at 10:31 PM (#5589459)
If anybody gets traded, I'll guess Gardner. He's very good on a good contract with one year and an option left so he'll bring back pretty good value (either something useful now or prospects). But obviously, he'd be nice to keep and they can walk away in a year if they want to. But a trade would put a Hicks/Ellsbury platoon in CF and make it a lot easier to give Frazier some ML playing time.


Trading Gardner makes the team much worse. The guy just put up a 4 or 5 WAR season for $12.5M. He's a steal.

Why would you trade him to platoon Ellsbury and Hicks who might not give you half that? Hell, the odds are better that they're both on the DL half the season than that they match Gardner's production.

They can get under the luxury tax w/o trading anyone.

You're assuming that Todd Frazier leaves, but what are you figuring for Clint? AAA for more seasoning?


Todd Frazier is a FA. Zero chance they offer him a contract.

Clint Frazier was only OK in AAA last year, and had no strike zone judgement in MLB. Another half season in AAA is fine for him.

Ellsbury or Hicks, or both, will be hurt by July.
   149. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 09, 2017 at 10:33 PM (#5589460)
Rumor mill has Hicks about to agree to a five-year deal.

That would be insane. They control him for two more seasons as it is, and he's already 28.
   150. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 09, 2017 at 10:37 PM (#5589461)
I know it was just a fluke of where the games were when he was healthy but how about those H/R splits of Bird last year:

237/345/548, 894 OPS at home
111/183/204, 387 OPS on road


When Bird was healthy in 2015, his numbers were

.235 .309 .459 .767 OPS at home
.292 .381 .611 .992 OPS on the road

So I wouldn't read too much into those 2017 numbers.
   151. The Yankee Clapper Posted: December 09, 2017 at 11:13 PM (#5589464)
Todd Frazier is a FA. Zero chance they offer him a contract.

It really doesn't work for the either Frazier or the Yankees, even though there is apparently a mutual high regard. Frazier is 31, still a useful player, but not really a star - this may be his last chance to get a multi-year contract for significant money. The Yankees want to get under the luxury tax threshold, so a high-priced spare part isn't in their plans, and even if trading other players provides an opportunity, there's no reason to block younger, cheaper, and quite possibly better players now in the minors. Just not a good fit.
   152. eric Posted: December 10, 2017 at 12:43 AM (#5589475)
Rumor mill says Hicks is getting a 5-year deal? I haven't heard that at all. Source?


Yeah, mea culpa. I read an article too quickly, and Hicks' name mixed with Cashman's name in my mind. It's Cashman who's rumored to be getting a five year extension.

I agree it would be insane.

Hicks is still a great 4th outfielder, however. And there's no way they trade Gardner at this point. His production for his price is a steal. I'm starting to doubt they move Ellsbury in the offseason. With so many injury-prone players, they need a deep OF, and it's unlikely they could both unload Ellsbury and find a replacement cost-effectively. That is, they likely end where the portion of Ellsbury salary they are still paying + cost of the new player > Ellsbury's current salary, with production that is no better.
   153. The Yankee Clapper Posted: December 10, 2017 at 12:56 AM (#5589476)
With so many injury-prone players, they need a deep OF, and it's unlikely they could both unload Ellsbury and find a replacement cost-effectively.

Clint Frazier would seem to fill that bill. They'd have to eat a lot of his salary to trade Ellsbury, but seems like the Yanks could put whatever they save to better use.
   154. ptodd Posted: December 10, 2017 at 03:07 AM (#5589485)
#90. Welcome to the real world. In this world a cartel (legal otherwise) does not want a new member who will fuel payroll inflation. Look at the new ownership Dodgers, sure they take on bad contracts which is not inflationary, or offer decent extensions to homegrown players, but they have not spent big on FA. The primary rule of any good capitalist is avoid competition at all costs. Competition kills profits. New owners are well chosen.

Some have mentioned why Stanton woukd want to leave Miami for NY w/o a financial incentive. Endorsements will be much higher in NY and the national exposure and YS3 (not to mention the Orioles pitching and AL East parks), and all that lineup protection will help his stats which shoukd be worth millions in Free Agency when he opts out
   155. Endless Trash Posted: December 10, 2017 at 04:16 AM (#5589487)
How so?


Let's see. Yankee legend Derek Jeter pays $35 to be in on the marlin ownership group so that he can be named CEO and makes it his top priority to ship the NL MVP to the Yankees in exchange for a half eaten bag of M&M's and a VHS copy of Glen or Glenda.

Terrific.
   156. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 10, 2017 at 06:59 AM (#5589491)
Well sure, I can see how someone might consider that untoward. If they were idiots entirely unattached from reality who didn’t know anything about baseball in general or the specific news regarding Stanton from the last week or so. But why should anyone care about this sort of rube? This is the sort of person who won’t attend an open-air ballgame anyhow, due to the presence of chemtrails overhead.
   157. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:38 AM (#5589496)
But you'd think that when it comes to placing expansion teams into areas with questionable demographics and knowing nothing but Spring training ticket prices, the other owners might have been a bit more careful about those to whom they were granting franchises, both about their financial situation AND their willingness to spend the money that's necessary to field a competitive team. It's hard to believe that they did that in the case of the Marlins.

#90. Welcome to the real world. In this world a cartel (legal otherwise) does not want a new member who will fuel payroll inflation. Look at the new ownership Dodgers, sure they take on bad contracts which is not inflationary, or offer decent extensions to homegrown players, but they have not spent big on FA. The primary rule of any good capitalist is avoid competition at all costs. Competition kills profits. New owners are well chosen.


Everything you say makes sense, but it also reaffirms why Florida fans were getting hit with a double whammy instead of a real chance to be able to root for a consistently competitive team. Bad ownership and a relatively small fan base can make for a lethal combination, and that's all Miami fans have ever had, thanks in great part to what you describe.
   158. Tony S Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:13 AM (#5589498)
I still have a hard time believing that the other three teams Stanton said he'd approve a trade to couldn't beat the Yankees' joke of an offer.

And the Marlins, you know, could have always kept him if the offers for him were unsatisfactory. This, of course, assumes that the Marlins are interested in placing a winning team on the field. That's a very questionable assumption.

How is the existence of organizations that are blatantly not trying to compete any good for the game? If anything good comes out of this episode, it's that it (further) exposes the claims that a shiny new taxpayer-funded ballpark helps a franchise remain competitive. Too bad it's too late for South Florida taxpayers...
   159. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:14 AM (#5589499)
Let's see. Yankee legend Derek Jeter pays $35 to be in on the marlin ownership group so that he can be named CEO and makes it his top priority to ship the NL MVP to the Yankees in exchange for a half eaten bag of M&M's and a VHS copy of Glen or Glenda.

Terrific.


I agree it looks bad, and is bad for baseball. But, you don't need any conspiracy theory here. Stanton vetoed deals to SF and StL. Jeter didn't try to send Stanton to NY.

Jeter simply sucks at his job, and didn't realize Stanton was running the show b/c of the NTC. (Which shouldn't surprise us, since he has no managerial, executive, or baseball ops experience of any sort.)

But once the definite intention to trade Stanton, for purely monetary reasons, was out there, the Marlins had zero leverage. Jeter apparently found this out very late in the game.
   160. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:51 AM (#5589507)
Jeter simply sucks at his job


LOL

“It was all Jetah! I coulda done bettah!”


But once the definite intention to trade Stanton, for purely monetary reasons, was out there, the Marlins had zero leverage.


Wow, I finally met the one person who didn’t know the Stanton contract was a gigantic milestone around the neck of a welfare franchise that couldn’t possibly afford it from literally the moment it was announced.
   161. Captain Supporter Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:06 AM (#5589509)
I love listening to people saying that Derek Jeter does not know what he is doing, and that they apparently know better. Apparently none of you have ever done any negotiating in your life. The Marlins had no leverage at all here. They did well to get anything at all back for Stanton given that he kept vetoing trades. They dumped the salary, got Castro who they can now trade to anyone they want, and got two somewhat promising kids. They had little or no chance of getting more.

If you want to blame anyone for the trade, blame MLB for allowing franchises to leverage themselves up in the way the Marlins did.
   162. Endless Trash Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:20 AM (#5589512)

I agree it looks bad, and is bad for baseball. But, you don't need any conspiracy theory here.


Then we agree completely, since I already said I don't believe in conspiracy theories. It looks bad and it's bad for baseball. Isn't that enough?

I get that Yankee fans are going to be defensive about this, but there's no need to attack everyone that dislikes it.

I don't believe in conspiracy theories, but somehow I am into chem trails according to your buddy there. Sense is fun to make.
   163. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:25 AM (#5589513)
Anyone who thinks that Jeter personally negotiated with NY, or with SF and StL for that matter, is delusional.
   164. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:58 AM (#5589516)
I agree it looks bad, and is bad for baseball.

It's no more "bad for baseball" than it is when any other small market, underfinanced team is forced to make a salary dump, or even more frequently, can't afford to keep its homegrown stars once they reach free agency. How on Earth is this worse for "baseball" than it was when the Mariners lost Randy Johnson, Griffey and ARod within less than three seasons?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I still have a hard time believing that the other three teams Stanton said he'd approve a trade to couldn't beat the Yankees' joke of an offer.

Hard to know that one way or the other without knowing what those other three teams' offers were.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you want to blame anyone for the trade, blame MLB for allowing franchises to leverage themselves up in the way the Marlins did.

It sure as hell isn't the Yankees' fault that MLB and the Jeffrey Loria put them in their current situation.
   165. Random Transaction Generator Posted: December 10, 2017 at 11:09 AM (#5589519)
How on Earth is this worse for "baseball" than it was when the Mariners lost Randy Johnson, Griffey and ARod within less than three seasons?


I know what you mean, but the team won 116 games that next season. :)
   166. Endless Trash Posted: December 10, 2017 at 11:15 AM (#5589523)
Those things were bad for baseball too. Not really sure what your point is.
   167. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 10, 2017 at 11:45 AM (#5589533)
How on Earth is this worse for "baseball" than it was when the Mariners lost Randy Johnson, Griffey and ARod within less than three seasons?

Those things were bad for baseball too. Not really sure what your point is.


My point is trying to find out what people mean by "bad for baseball", and it's nice to see that your response isn't directed only against the latest beneficiary of a small market team's misfortune.
   168. Buck Coats Posted: December 10, 2017 at 11:59 AM (#5589539)
Those 3 guys also all left as FAs or traded as pending FAs, not "signed for the next 10 years and traded away anyway"
   169. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 10, 2017 at 12:11 PM (#5589542)
Those 3 guys also all left as FAs or traded as pending FAs, not "signed for the next 10 years and traded away anyway"

True, but the common point between the Mariners and the Marlins is that neither team (felt they) could afford to keep their superstars. Obviously the difference was that in the short run the Mariners weren't hurt by their loss**, but by 2004 they were back in the doldrums while A-Rod and Johnson were still at their peaks. Whatever the particular circumstances may be that surround their departures, for the fans of small market teams stripped of their superstars it's six of one and half a dozen of the other.

** Though it likely hurt them in the postseason
   170. The Yankee Clapper Posted: December 10, 2017 at 12:21 PM (#5589547)
I still have a hard time believing that the other three teams Stanton said he'd approve a trade to couldn't beat the Yankees' joke of an offer.

Despite leaks at every stage of the Stanton saga, there's not the slightest indication that either the Astros, Cubs, or Dodgers made a better offer. Now, I'm on record in other threads as thinking the Marlins should have tried keeping Stanton and marketing him before trying to trade him, but most folks here seemed to think trading Stanton's contract was the better move. Apparently, the Marlins agreed, but it is beyond silly to suggest the Marlins didn't take the best deal they could get.
   171. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 10, 2017 at 01:29 PM (#5589566)
I love listening to people saying that Derek Jeter does not know what he is doing, and that they apparently know better. Apparently none of you have ever done any negotiating in your life. The Marlins had no leverage at all here. They did well to get anything at all back for Stanton given that he kept vetoing trades. They dumped the salary, got Castro who they can now trade to anyone they want, and got two somewhat promising kids. They had little or no chance of getting more.

If you want to blame anyone for the trade, blame MLB for allowing franchises to leverage themselves up in the way the Marlins did.


The Marlins lack of leverage was of their own making. They're the ones who announced they had to slash payroll, and flogged Stanton to every team under the sun. A competent front office would have acted like they wanted to build around Stanton, and weren't slashing payroll.

They also could have declined to trade Stanton when it was apparent he wouldn't bring anything close to a decent return.

Why would I blame MLB? They're not going to refuse the high bid. The idiots were the ones who paid $1B for a $600M franchise.
   172. John DiFool2 Posted: December 10, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5589569)
Jeter simply sucks at his job


LOL

“It was all Jetah! I coulda done bettah!”



Past a diving Jeter...
   173. Nero Wolfe, Indeed Posted: December 10, 2017 at 02:18 PM (#5589578)
I'm not willing to jump directly into a conspiracy theory on this trade. I get the Marlins stuck themselves in a hole, and Stanton had all the leverage.

However, if the Marlins make another lopsided trade with the Yankees....
   174. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 10, 2017 at 02:37 PM (#5589586)
Why would I blame MLB? They're not going to refuse the high bid. The idiots were the ones who paid $1B for a $600M franchise.

IOW MLB has some sort of quasi-moral obligation to consider only short term profits and ignore obvious warning signs of long range disaster. I'll abstain from making any obvious political comparisons. (smile)

   175. charityslave is thinking about baseball Posted: December 10, 2017 at 03:35 PM (#5589604)
Let's congratulate the real winner here- Didi Gregorius, who will likely hit behind Judge and Stanton and ahead of Sanchez
   176. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 10, 2017 at 03:57 PM (#5589620)
Let's congratulate the real winner here- Didi Gregorius, who will likely hit behind Judge and Stanton and ahead of Sanchez
"Yes in-DIDI! GreGORious is Di-GLORious!!! And he make Yankees fans eu-PHORious!!!! And up-ROARious!!!!"

Better get used to it. (smile)
   177. The Yankee Clapper Posted: December 10, 2017 at 04:27 PM (#5589632)
Let's congratulate the real winner here- Didi Gregorius, who will likely hit behind Judge and Stanton and ahead of Sanchez

There are a lot of options - Aaron "Lucky" Boone is probably busily doodling line-ups while smiling broadly - but Greg Bird may get the prime spot between 2 of the Big 3 right-handed hitters. Sanchez could spend some time as the #2 hitter, too, as in 2017. But any spot in the line-up looks to be pretty good at the moment.
   178. Walt Davis Posted: December 10, 2017 at 04:28 PM (#5589635)
1) The Marlins might hold onto Castro (depending on offers of course). The Dee Gordon trade makes even more sense now -- the same position and about the same AAV as Castro who they knew they'd have to take on. So the non-Stanton payroll doesn't go up.

2) Buying a company and then slashing costs is standard practice in every industry these days, no surprise it works that way in baseball now. It's about finance and making money, not winning baseball games.

3) The Cubs really couldn't have beaten this offer other than possibly taking on more money. The best prospect in the system is graded B by Sickels and is still probably a couple of years away. We could have included Schwarber or Happ instead of Castro I suppose. The Dodgers and Astros have some talent though.

4) But again, the Marlins' goal was shedding the long-term commitment and Stanton's long-term commitment was already as much, maybe more, than what he'd get on the open market. They were never going to get top prospect talent back here and that was more obvious once Stanton started vetoing trades. (It sounds like the Cards' offer wasn't too bad.) Other teams are also run financially now and we see far fewer trades of talent in exchange for market-value contracts.

5) The Marlins could have afforded him. The negative value of this contract is vastly over-stated -- at most it's overpriced by about $5 M per year which isn't great but is not a millstone to a $1B business that's still (somehow) appreciating in value. MLB's common revenue and MLBAM payments have made it so every franchise can afford at least one big contract.

5a) Stanton doesn't start making as much money as Cabrera until 2023. Over the next 6 seasons, he makes just $17 M more than Votto (for his age 34-40 seasons). He will never make as much money in a season as Greinke (unless maybe he opts out). Over the next 5 years, he's owed $20 M more than Chris Davis. Over the next 4 years, it's $20 M more than Freddie Freeman. They haven't landed anybody yet, but the Cards have been making these sorts of offers for the last couple of years.

5b) Oakland, now that they are off the extra revenue sharing list, might be broken enough that they can't afford a contract like this (until a new stadium giveaway and/or big TV deal); Tampa might be broken enough. In the NL, I suspect even Milwaukee could handle a deal like this (as noted, Cincy has a deal like this with Votto).

6) So the bean counters decided the profit margin would benefit from dumping as much of his salary and long-term commitment as possible ... and they're probably right (they're the expert bean counters). But they could have managed just fine on a lower profit margin if they wanted to win some extra baseball games instead.
   179. PreservedFish Posted: December 10, 2017 at 04:49 PM (#5589644)
Reaching back to the first page:

Jeter isn't a plant, I'm sure he made what he thought was the best deal for the Marlins.



I'm pretty sure that Hill and Denbo made the deal, not Jeter.


I'm not sure at all about this. We know that ownership often takes the lead on the most significant moves, especially when they're for big bucks. This is the biggest bucks thing they'll do for years, potentially. And this move is 100% ownership driven.

Jeter is the "CEO." If he's not trying to put his mark on the major baseball moves, what's he doing? Seriously. What does he do all day?

Hill is a holdover from the beloved Loria regime. It's fair to assume there's a target on his back. He has a big contract, otherwise he might be gone already. The idea that Jeter would just delegate this to Hill strains credulity, in my opinion.

I had never heard of Denbo. Apparently he's the player development VP. Not sure why he'd really be involved, unless he was given a totally inaccurate job title.
   180. BDC Posted: December 10, 2017 at 05:01 PM (#5589647)
the bean counters decided the profit margin would benefit from dumping as much of his salary and long-term commitment as possible ... and they're probably right

Quite possibly. But I have to think there's some revenue benefit to having a big marquee star player. Fielding a good product – whether by winning games or having exciting players (or preferably both) – is not just a romantic disinterested display of sportsmanship.

Maybe I'm wrong. As you say, the common revenue may be such a large factor that cutting costs to the bone is the only sensible approach. But clearly if you want to generate local revenue (whether by attracting fans or getting a better TV deal in a couple of years) you have to pay some attention to the product.
   181. Howie Menckel Posted: December 10, 2017 at 05:32 PM (#5589662)
a persuasive counter-argument

"Derek Jeter as a double agent, working to help his old team? That would make as much sense as suggesting the former Yankees captain would use Alex Rodriguez as his “Phone a friend” were he to ever appear on “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?”

You can bet a year’s worth of gift baskets that trading his expensive, unhappy superstar Giancarlo Stanton to the Yankees brought only unhappiness to the Marlins’ rookie CEO. That being cornered into making this deal, which resulted in sizable social-media mocking that questioned his true loyalties, has to add aggravation to what has been a very rough opening act of Jeter’s new career.

He’ll have his opportunity to defend this transaction, to insist that his ownership group has the financial fortitude and baseball savvy to pull the Marlins out of their morass. What he can’t say, but what everyone in New York knows, is this:

The last thing he wants to do is help the Yankees.

After playing baseball, Jeter’s greatest gift might be his ability to hold a grudge. Remember that turbulent negotiation during Jeter’s one experience as a free agent, between the 2010 and 2011 seasons? Jeter does."
   182. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 10, 2017 at 05:33 PM (#5589663)
I had never heard of Denbo. Apparently he's the player development VP. Not sure why he'd really be involved, unless he was given a totally inaccurate job title


Denbo oversaw the Yankees minor league resurgence over the past few years. Presumably he was the one who selected the prospects being sent to Miami as he knows that system better than anyone.
   183. kwarren Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:38 PM (#5589842)
I know what you mean, but the team won 116 games that next season. :)


I seriously doubt that the Marlins with be able to win even 110 games next season.
   184. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 11, 2017 at 07:54 AM (#5589899)
Heyman: Marlins asked for Yankees’ top prospects. Adams, Sheffield, and the new hotness Florial were where they started discussions. “How about a guy who throws 103MPH and Deavers’ cousin?”
   185. Lassus Posted: December 11, 2017 at 08:06 AM (#5589901)
a persuasive counter-argument

Yeah, no. It is A counter-argument, sure.
   186. Greg K Posted: December 11, 2017 at 08:09 AM (#5589902)
Denbo had a brief stint as the Jays hitting coach. All I recall were constant complaints that he was directing everyone to take too many pitches.

Maybe you need to give a guy more than one year to make a difference.
   187. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 11, 2017 at 09:11 AM (#5589914)
a persuasive counter-argument

Yeah, no. It is A counter-argument, sure.


Well the initial argument itself is nuts.
   188. Count Vorror Rairol Mencoon (CoB) Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:07 AM (#5590019)
It's official.

Press conference scheduled for 2pm.
   189. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:26 AM (#5590060)
IOW MLB has some sort of quasi-moral obligation to consider only short term profits and ignore obvious warning signs of long range disaster.

It's very hard to stop an owner from accepting the high bid. A group of other owners is just not going to sign off on that very often. Even the most leveraged MLB teams are not highly leveraged in general corporate terms. Having $400M of debt and $700M of equity is quite low leverage.

The leverage only becomes an issue because many MLB teams are not run to maximize profits; the owners care about winning more. The team is more of a play thing than a business. The leveraged teams can't compete with those owners.
   190. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 11, 2017 at 01:00 PM (#5590169)
Great quote from the Boston Globe's Alex Speier, in his "108 Stitches" blog:
What does the Yankees’ acquisition of slugger Giancarlo Stanton mean for the Red Sox’ offseason? While some approached the question delicately, others saw no need to sugarcoat.

“It [expletives] our [expletive] up,” said one team official.
   191. Howie Menckel Posted: December 11, 2017 at 01:13 PM (#5590184)
a persuasive counter-argument

Yeah, no. It is A counter-argument, sure.

well, it's well understood that Jeter was infuriated by those contract talks. he got a buddy in the media to publish a bizarre number (I think it was 4 yrs, $92M), and was pissed that Cashman decided to exploit his leverage to a fraction of that.

it's also true that he has been scarce around Yankee Stadium since he left. I would say the premise of the article is more believable than the idea that his ego has recovered and/or that he planted seeds for years so that he could become part-owner of a team so that he could then send their best player to the Yankees.
   192. Nasty Nate Posted: December 11, 2017 at 01:26 PM (#5590191)
He played for the team for 4 more years after that negotiation, and was never asked to move positions and the organization devoted a year to celebrating him, but he supposedly still has a grudge against them? And that has manifested in him not being supposedly happy (completely in private) with this trade? Why didn't it manifest in him blocking the trade, or negotiating for more than 15 minutes? Or anything at all to stick it to the Yankees during the process?

The Post article isn't even reporting that the trade makes him unhappy (there are not even any anonymous sources); it's just assuming he is.
   193. Endless Trash Posted: December 11, 2017 at 01:29 PM (#5590198)
Wow, who wants to be a millionaire. There's a timely reference. Was Stanton even alive when that aired?

So, the NL MVP for starlin Castro and a 22 year old a ball pitcher. Honestly this trade should be vetoed.
   194. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 11, 2017 at 01:53 PM (#5590218)
So, the NL MVP for starlin Castro and a 22 year old a ball pitcher. Honestly this trade should be vetoed.

Well, bring back Bowie Kuhn and he'll see what he can do.
   195. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 11, 2017 at 02:06 PM (#5590235)
   196. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: December 11, 2017 at 02:18 PM (#5590252)
Wow, who wants to be a millionaire. There's a timely reference. Was Stanton even alive when that aired?

That was early 2000s when we reached Peak Regis. Stanton would have been around 10-12 or so when it debuted.
   197. Walt Davis Posted: December 11, 2017 at 08:14 PM (#5590496)
Quite possibly. But I have to think there's some revenue benefit to having a big marquee star player. Fielding a good product – whether by winning games or having exciting players (or preferably both) – is not just a romantic disinterested display of sportsmanship.

I agree with this but presumably that varies by market potential, future payrolls, Stanton's ability to put extra butts in seats (relative to a team that still has Yelich, Ozuna, Realmuto), Stanton's likelihood of staying healthy, the long-term financial implications, the ownership's short/long-term financial situation and cash flow, the risk/reward tradeoff and ... I assume their bean counters are fairly "expert" in those areas, presumably better than me. Maybe they also figure this leading to a Cubs-style rebuild is the way to go even in baseball terms. People here are often against the "drive for 75" and this was a 77-win team last year unlikely to invest substantially more and no new impact talent available in the short-term that I know of. With Stanton's great season, they were still last in the NL in attendance (although 1.5 M doesn't seem TOO bad).

I kinda hope this approach blows up in their faces too but it was clearly their planned strategy when they bought the team and they announced it almost immediately. MLB ownership deals are more and more finance-based -- often guys who made their billions in finance or even (as here) a fairly large ownership group of investors. MLB looks like an investor's paradise -- keep payroll low, guaranteed short-term profits, seemingly guaranteed franchise appreciation, sell it 10 years from now for $2+ B. Good return, low risk, nearly the equivalent of "too big to fail" ... what's not to like?
   198. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 11, 2017 at 09:32 PM (#5590505)
With Stanton's great season, they were still last in the NL in attendance (although 1.5 M doesn't seem TOO bad).

And with Stanton in the lineup for the first half of 2015, the Marlins didn't draw any better than they did after Stanton's season-ending injury. Great as he's been, he's never been 1998 McGwire or 1972 Carlton in terms of attendance boosts. He may prove to be one for the Yankees, but they were likely to be a great draw anyway, with Judge and all of their other young stars. Winning is still the biggest drawing factor.
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

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
Harry Balsagne
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (April - June 2018)
(48 - 12:18pm, Apr 22)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogESPN's top 50 players
(33 - 12:17pm, Apr 22)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogOT - 2017-18 NBA thread (All-Star Weekend to End of Time edition)
(2367 - 12:10pm, Apr 22)
Last: PJ Martinez

NewsblogLook at the size of this WEEKEND OMNICHATTER!, for April 21-22, 2018
(126 - 12:07pm, Apr 22)
Last: Panik on the streets of London (Trout! Trout!)

NewsblogOTP 2018 Apr 16: Beto strikes out but is a hit at baseball fundraiser
(1231 - 11:53am, Apr 22)
Last: zenbitz

NewsblogOT: Winter Soccer Thread
(1545 - 11:49am, Apr 22)
Last: strong silence

NewsblogBraves sign Jose Bautista to a minor-league contract, will play third base
(35 - 11:48am, Apr 22)
Last: The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s

NewsblogCallaway says Harvey might not make his next start after performance in 12-4 loss to Braves
(7 - 11:48am, Apr 22)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogWhite Sox pitcher Danny Farquhar in critical condition after suffering ruptured aneurysm
(9 - 10:37am, Apr 22)
Last: Greg Pope

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1942 Ballot
(3 - 9:28am, Apr 22)
Last: Chris Fluit

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1942 Discussion
(11 - 9:27am, Apr 22)
Last: Chris Fluit

NewsblogBBTF ANNUAL CENTRAL PARK SOFTBALL GAME 2018
(63 - 8:48am, Apr 22)
Last: Blastin

NewsblogNYTimes: Now Batting in Class AA: Biggio, Bichette and Guerrero
(7 - 8:28am, Apr 22)
Last: Greg K

NewsblogBryan Price dismissed as Reds manager | MLB.com
(97 - 10:02pm, Apr 21)
Last: Panic

NewsblogWhy the drop in home runs in 2018? Major League Baseball had better hope it’s the weather.
(12 - 9:43pm, Apr 21)
Last: Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network)

Page rendered in 0.5837 seconds
47 querie(s) executed