MLB Trade Rumors


Use our rumors form to send us mlb trade rumors.

(single word yields best result)
We've now created a mental health web site

This page last updated: 20:12:52

The sent in rumors have been split into 2 pages. The MLB Talk page is the other page.

24 Oct 2020 02:55:12
Yankees Offseason


Trade #1

Indians get Luke Voit, Clint Frazier, Deivi Garcia, and Jonathan Holder

Yankees get Francisco Lindor

Trade #2

Brewers get Miguel Andujar, Luis Gil, Oswaldo Perez, and Estevan Florial

Yankees get Josh Hader

Free Agency

Resign D.J. LeMahieu for 3 years and $66 million

Sign Trevor Bauer for 1 year and $30 million

Sign Michael Brantley for 2 years and $36 million

Roster (Full Health)


1B LeMahieu
RF Judge
SS Lindor
DH Stanton
LF Brantley
2B Torres
C Sanchez
3B Urshela
CF Hicks


C Higashioka
1B Ford
IF Wade
IF Estrada
OF Tauchman




Loaisiga (Swingman)
Nelson (Middle Reliever)
Green (Middle Reliever)
Ottavino (Middle Reliever)
Hader (7th Inning Setup Man)
Britton (8th Inning Setup Man)
Chapman (Closer)

Believable1 Unbelievable1

24 Oct 2020 15:53:34
It's a sad state of affairs on this site when bwright's trades make more sense than Chi Sox's.

Crazy stuff.

Agree3 Disagree0

24 Oct 2020 15:58:40
Sort of believable. Deal # 1 and # 2 may find more of a liking if there is some switching of the same guys:

Trade #1

Indians get Miguel Andujar, Clint Frazier, Estevan Florial, and Jonathan Holder

Yankees get Francisco Lindor

Trade #2

Brewers get Luke Voit, Luis Gil, Oswaldo Perez, and Deivi Garcia

Yankees get Josh Hader

The Brewers have a stronger need for a position playing power guy (Voit) and pitching. The Indians have a stronger need for both young and MLB ready outfielders. This change facilitates these two needs.

Agree0 Disagree0

22 Oct 2020 22:42:46
Some winter Trades:


Mets get: Francisco Lindor
Indians get: Brandon Nimmo (OF), Andres Gimenez (SS), Matthew Allan (RHP), Ryley Gilliam (RHP) .


Angels: Joe Musgrove
Pirates: Brandon Marsh (OF), Patrick Sandoval (LHP), Chris Rodriguez (RHP)


Braves: Nolan Arenado (3B), Mychal Givens (RHP)
Rockies: Touki Toussaint (RHP), Drew Waters (OF), Adam Duvall (OF), Brooks WIlson (RHP) .


Phillies: Gary Sanchez (C), Jordan Montgomery (LHP)
Yankees: Zach Eflin (RHP)


Diamondbacks: Whit Merrifield
Royals: Jon Duplantier (RHP), Alek Thomas (OF), Josh Green (RHP)


Brewers: Lance Lynn (RHP)
Rangers: Mario Feliciano (C), Aaron Ashby (LHP)


White Sox: Josh Hader (LHP)
Brewers: Andrew Vaughn (1B), Konnor Pilkington (LHP), Tyler Johnson (RHP)


Giants: Spencer Turnbull (RHP)
Tigers: Alexander Canario (OF), Melvin Adon (RHP) .

Believable0 Unbelievable0

23 Oct 2020 01:18:42
Some explanations:

1. The Mets are going to make a splash. A new owner is going to want to acquire one significant player, and BVW will absolutely pull the trigger on Lindor. This would get the Indians' attention and suits many of their immediate needs, with an arm to develop, which they like.

2. Might be a slight overpay from LA, but it'd make it easier for them getting Musgrove on a cheap salary.

3. Arenado's trade value will be difficult to track down. That contract is yucky and he'd be leaving Coors, but Atlanta isn't giving up pieces that would hurt them.

4. Eflin is criminally underrated, and it seems the Yankees have grown tired of Sanchez. Getting Sanchez back with Girardi in a weak catchers market would be a great move. Would the Phillies give up Eflin for Montgomery? That's the question.

5. Merrifield is wasting away on a bad Royals team. Getting Thomas as a future OF along with Duplaniter would help tremendously in KC.

6. Brewers need pitching and have some payroll to work with. He'd make sense in a competitive NL Central division.

7. I'm just trolling Chi Sox at this point. Hader is going to require a haul for Milwaukee to let him go, and while Vaughn is an obvious overpay, it's closer to what the Brewers would demand. (And frankly, if Vaughn weren't a White Sox prospect, Chi Sox wouldn't give two you-know-whats about him being involved) .

8. Turnbull is the kind of guy Zaidi has targeted since coming to San Francisco. Decent peripherals with two plus-pitches. Zaidi will probably find a way to get the Tigers to take two twinkies and a nutri-grain bar for him.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 05:03:18
No top-100 prospect for Evan Longoria this time through? Dang it.

Agree1 Disagree2

23 Oct 2020 06:09:42
Also would be kinda interesting to see the White Sox with 3 of the top 5 left handed relief pitchers in MLB.

But I'll say what I've said a couple times on here - trade major pen pieces at the deadline, not in the offseason. You almost always get more.

Agree1 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 16:36:09
Giants, unlike the White Sox, have come to the new age of baseball. They no longer give up prospects like, say, Fernando Tatis, Jr. for guys like James Shields.

I wonder which existing GM did that?

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 17:22:17
As far as that "top 100" prospect given up for Longoria is concerned, the guy has been cut by two teams and will likely be a AAAA guy in Boston until they need the roster spot.

The only relatively decent player given up in that trade was Stephen Woods, and even then, he's a 25-year-old in High-A that missed all of 2018 and, now, all of 2020.

For all the bad trades the old Giants regime made (McCutchen, Matt Moore), the Longoria one hasn't been that bad.

Now, if you want to talk about bad trades, we can talk about the Samardzija trade or the Todd Frazier trade. Bassitt, Semien, and Montas are all legitimately good MLB players.

I'm not sure White Sox fans should criticize any team about bad trades.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 18:32:54
You proposed the Giants get Duran from the Twins a couple months ago. It's hilarious to think you believe that the Longoria trade has been anything but a huge failure for the Giants, a theme that helping them quickly close their contention window. Longoria struggles to hit league average (if he's even on the field), but is still paid like a star. But kudos to them for moving on to Zaidi, who has done a nice job thus far.

Criticize Hahn all you want, but in the grand scheme he did an unreal job of extending Sale, Quintana, and Eaton at the perfect time and then trading them at the peak of their value - securing an ace, budding superstar third baseman, and perennial 40 HR, .300 hitter, not to mention the potential of Kopech, Dunning, and Cease. Not to mention inking Robert, finding Anderson out of a nowhere JUCO (he got killed initially for that pick), and the last 3 drafts that look pretty darn good. The Kuechel and Grandal signings are icing on the cake.

The Giants will be very lucky to be in that position after 3 years of their rebuild.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 19:10:04
Longoria, in the grand scheme of things, is a wash. He's not hurting the Giants financially. In fact, the Giants could cut Longoria and run 3B with a combo of Wilmer Flores and Donovan Solano, who they pay a combined total of less than 4M a year.

At the time of the trade, the Giants didn't have an MLB-ready 3B. The free agent options for 3B were:

-Mike Moustakas (came with a QO attached)
-Todd Frazier

That's it. Those are the only 3B who signed MLB deals that winter. So it was make a trade, or keep Pablo Sandoval as the 3B. They weren't doing either, so they made a trade. The only other 3B that was notably on the block was Chase Headley (go look how he did in 2018).

The trade wasn't popular, and it didn't make a lot of sense, considering the Giants giving up young talent for stars well past their prime, but again, the Giants actually fired their GM the next winter. They recognize they made a massive mistake.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 19:20:08
The Bobby Evans era in San Francisco was a failure of massive proportions, and the Giants are still paying the price.

But, to suggest it's going to be a long time before they are in the White Sox position shows your ignorance to what Zaidi has done.

Like he did time and time again in LA, Zaidi waved his magic wand and turned guys like Mike Yastrzemski, Donovan Solano, and Alex Dickerson from castaways into legit talents. Yaz has a surplus value of around 60M. Need you be reminded, Yaz played over 500 games in the Orioles minors and they never gave him a shot.

Between that and restocking with young talent overnight. And he did so with almost no consequence. He got Jordan Humphreys for Billy Hamilton. Basabe for cash (thanks Rick Hahn), Anthony Banda for cash. Daniel Robertson for cash. Will Wilson just by taking on Zack Cozart.

The Giants won't be contenders next year, but if you think they are a long way away, you're not paying attention.

The White Sox would gladly fire Rick Hahn to take someone with Farhan Zaidi's track record.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 20:04:34
Except, they don't have to. Hahn built an affordable AL force. Give credit where credit is due.

The best case scenario for the Giants is contending in 2023, and that's absolutely best case even with their spending capabilities.

You getting excited about those AAAA guys is cute though. I remember those days.

I also remember the days when you told me Luis Robert could never headline a Noah Syndergaard trade. Sheesh.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 20:18:12
"Longoria is not hurting the Giants financially".

Whoo boy.

Agree1 Disagree1

23 Oct 2020 20:19:21
AAAA guys? Obviously, not all of the guys Zaidi acquired will amount to team contributors. But it's not like Zaidi doesn't have a track record of these kind of moves. Value-grabs on guys no one else wants.

It's almost like there's two teams in the World Series employing similar strategies. Interesting.

As far as the future is concerned, the Giants have legit talent coming up the pipeline soon. Ramos, Bishop, Canario, Hjelle, Corry, Wilson, etc. I'd imagine they'll even try to fast track Luciano. They'll have tons of money coming off the books after 2021 (Belt, Crawford, Cueto), and very well might clear at least one of those contracts before 2021 begins.

I'd place good money on the following bet: The Giants will ANOTHER win THREE World Series before the White Sox even win one.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 20:28:09
Also, as flattered as I am that you still reflect on conversations from two years ago, it's a little insane how much space I take up in that noggin of yours.

As much as you love to deny it, I seem to be on your mind a lot, as you reference me all the time.

In fact, it's pretty clear that you trying to bring up past conversations is evidence that you can't keep up in the current one, so your last-ditch effort is to pull whatever tricks you can to look correct.

You were wrong about the Longoria trade. It's okay. You should be used to it by now. It's probably time to head upstairs and get your dinner from mom. I hear it's your favorite: chicken nuggets and apple sauce. Enjoy.

Agree1 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 20:54:43
I reference you all the time? Who just posted a trade to "troll me"? We're trolling people now? And I'm the one getting dinner from mom?

You're willing to bet money that your team wins 3 titles before mine wins 1? And I'm the homer?

You just can't make this stuff up.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 22:43:16
How are them chicken nuggets tho?

Agree1 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 22:49:59
You've mentioned me in like 2-3 posts. You clearly recall, vividly, what comments I've made several years ago.

Meanwhile, I had to be reminded this website even existed still and then I showed up and was reminded of your existence.

I bet you're used to that by now.

Agree1 Disagree1

24 Oct 2020 07:20:03
It's hard to forget you saying Robert couldn't headline a Syndergaard deal. He was like a 50-60th ranked prospect when he came over from Cuba, and you scoffed at me for asserting that he would be a top-5 prospect in a couple years.

Yet here we are. On a forum where we are supposed to discuss trades, he probably in the top-10 in the sport in trade value.

It was probably smart to make a new account and try to limit the trail of abhorrent takes that people can reference.

Agree0 Disagree0

24 Oct 2020 15:38:41
Since it still exists for posterity sake, we can click on your profile observe some of your other gems.

-Rutherford, Adolfo, Henzman for Greinke, Peralta and 25M.

Looking at it now, you weren't even close. The Astros gave up far more for JUST Zack Greinke, not even adding in Peralta (who was almost a 4 win player when you tried adding him in) .

The White Sox gave up more for Nomar Mazara.

Speaking of Mazara, you did this one:

-Walker, Stiever, Johnson for Benintendi, Price and 21M.

They gave up Walker for Mazara, who is a worse player and has aa full season more of service time.

I'm not sure you get to criticize anyone's trade ideas.

Agree0 Disagree0

24 Oct 2020 16:28:52
I'm flattered you find it important to remember me.

And no, since it's still up, I thought I'd remind you of the quote I made:

"That Robert is a top 10 prospect or not is irrelevant when I think the Mets will want even better players yet, prospects or not. "

Literally every indication at the time from beat writers and folks in the know suggested that the Mets were demanding two top 10 prospects for Syndergaard. This isn't even new information at this point.

So, for me to say that it would take more than Luis Robert to get Syndergaard at the time wasn't outrageous. It fit in with the reality of what the Mets were asking for.

They were also looking for MLB ready players. In the 2017-18 offseason, Robert wasn't near MLB-ready (he debuted this year) . In fact, none of the guys (Robert, Cease, Adams) were MLB-ready at the beginning of 2018. And in 2019, when he had less team control, the price never shifted, hence why he's still with the Mets.

You love to criticize my response, but you get absolutely triggered any time someone else isn't getting their rocks off to White Sox players. The truth is, your trade was bad. And you got called out for it.

But if any disagreement with your opinion makes you remember it for THREE YEARS (that was October of 2017), then maybe you need to quit thinking so highly of yourself.

Agree0 Disagree0

24 Oct 2020 18:51:55
When has a team ever traded 2 top-10 prospects in the same deal? A team rarely even has 2 top-10 prospects. The Mets were not asking for that. The Sox didn't even get that for Sale. Trading Syndergaard would have signified a rebuild, therefore MLB-ready talent wouldn't have been necessary. He wasn't moved because they decided to not rebuild.

Still, this was your most recent deadline deal proposal. This site sees 25-player deals, the Yankees spending $700 million in an offseason, and then stuff like this. A Giants homer thinking that Evan Longoria is worth more than a bucket of balls and 2 fungo bats. But a top-100, stud pitching prospect from the Twins. But that's not even enough for you. They'd have to throw in a another solid, MLB-ready, top-20 org pitching prospect too. Just horrendous.

"Twins get: Evan Longoria, $20M
Giants get: Edwar Colina (RHP), Jhoan Duran (RHP)

Twins have one of the worst 3B situations - hitting a very nice 69 wRC+ from that position. Giants pay down some of that salary to get a better prospect (Duran) . "

The team literally had Josh Donaldson on a 4-year deal.

It's also funny that you think the Giants were "forced to make the deal for Longoria because of a lack of other options", so their only choice was to acquire a declining third baseman coming off a .730 OPS that was owed more than $80 million guaranteed. You're never forced to do something as dumb as that. They won't even get an average hitter after all is said and done. Even the magician Zaidi can't make that deal disappear, and neither can you

With the constraints they have, the Giants really bailed out the Rays and helped make it possible for them to contend here in the past couple of seasons.

Agree0 Disagree0

15 Oct 2020 20:40:23
White Sox/Mets/Pirates

White Sox Get:

Brandon Nimmo OF

Mets Get:

Joe Musgrove RHP

Pirates Get:

Matthew Thompson RHP
Micker Adolfo OF
Zack Burdi RHP

Believable2 Unbelievable5

21 Oct 2020 02:14:38
A trade from a guy named "Chi Sox" that gives the White Sox a really good player without giving up anything in return.

Seems awfully suspicious.

Agree5 Disagree0

21 Oct 2020 14:03:28
Before Chi Sox jumps in with some lousy defense of his lousy trade, here are the facts:

Adolfo is the "best" player in this trade, and he's a 24-year-old who hasn't played but a handful of games above high-A ball (and it was a good AA stint, either) .

Thompson is a 20-year-old with 2.0 IP in his pro career. A kid with pretty major control issues and consistency issues, according to scouts. A year away from baseball did not do him any favors.

And Zack Burdi was a cute entry. Get him in the same organization as his older brother. Only problem is, Zack is far worse than his brother. Zack loves to serve up home runs.

Outside of clearly being a homer, I don't know why you'd think anyone would be interested in this package for guys with 3 remaining years of control each. This is clearly one-sided and you know it.

And please spare yourself of trying to defend any of the players you put in the package or trying to downplay Nimmo/ Musgrove. It won't end well.

Agree5 Disagree1

21 Oct 2020 22:39:03
Good to see the Statbook is back under a new name just in time for the offseason. Thanks for the feedback.

Agree0 Disagree2

21 Oct 2020 22:55:42
I'm willing to say this is light for the Sox to Pit.

What I will add though:

Stiever could be another option as the headliner, you make a good point about Thompson not having the pro-ball looks yet. But he has a projectable frame and smooth delivery that projects as a starter long term.

There were reports that teams liked Adolfo's alternate sight numbers, particularly some insane batted ball metrics that give a guy like him upside. The swing and miss issues? Undoubtedly a concern.

Burdi has potential back-end stuff (particularly 98 mph at almost 2600 rpms with his heater) . It's not crazy to take a chance on that.

Agree0 Disagree2

22 Oct 2020 18:41:42
I should be a little more fair. You mentioned decent players. But if I'm Pittsburgh, and I'm giving up Joe Musgrove, who has been stellar and has 3 years of team control still, I'm wanting an elite prospect. I think Andrew Vaughn would be someone who would get the talks going, and even then, he's probably not enough.

Agree0 Disagree0

22 Oct 2020 18:42:55
As far as this proposal goes, another thing to consider: there's almost no reason to Chicago to be involved. The Mets could get Musgrove (as they are in this deal) and send Brandon Nimmo and another prospect (Matthew Allan, for example) to Pittsburgh and it'd be a pretty fair deal.

Agree0 Disagree0

22 Oct 2020 20:36:04
But Nimmo makes little sense for Pittsburgh. They aren't contending in the next 2 (not 3) seasons when they'd have control of him. That's why the Sox are involved. Pittsburgh is in the thick of a rebuild without a light at the end of the tunnel yet.

Even if the Sox were crazy and wanted to offer Vaughn for Nimmo, how does he fit for the Mets? Not great at all. Dylan Cease or Michael Kopech? Not great either because you don't really know what they are going to give you in 2021. The Mets, assuming they want to contend right a away with new ownership, need 2 SPs (maybe 3) and a CFer (as a start) . They can expend one of their 4 (all pretty quality btw) left handed corner OFers to get Musgrove for Nimmo, who are pretty close in value.

Musgrove will be cheaper than bringing Stroman back or going after Bauer/ Gausman, so they can go hard after George Springer maybe. That's seemingly a good fit.

Andrew Vaughn, a top-20 prospect and one of the best bats in the minors, for 2 years (not 3) of Joe Musgrove? Cmon, let's not do this. He had a good 8-start sample this year, but we can't treat it like it was a 30-start sample. He's a very good pitcher, but isn't worth $55 million+ in surplus value, as you're suggesting.

Another iteration could be the Sox throwing Adam Engel to the Mets to take over Marisnick's role and have them give another prospect to the Pittsburgh, maybe Allen as you suggested.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 00:34:29
Sure. It makes no sense for Pittsburgh, but if they are forced to choose between the package the White Sox gave, or Brandon Nimmo, they'll take Nimmo a thousand times.

And according to Fangraphs, Spotrac, Cots' Baseball Contracts, and Baseball-Reference, Joe Musgrove is a free agent after 2023. That's 3 years of a budding ace. Musgrove was literally a 3.3 WAR player in 2019. It's not like you're trading for Jeff Samardzija here.

But this is what you do. You make outlandish ideas, then you try to downplay the players involved so you can justify your outlandish idea.

The moral of the story is: Pittsburgh isn't giving up Joe Musgrove for a bunch of lottery tickets. The Giants got more for a rental of Sam Dyson than the White Sox are giving up for 3 years of a controllable starter.

If you want guys like Brandon Nimmo or Joe Musgrove, you actually have to give up real talent for them. You can try and twist and contort the conversation to move the goalposts 18,000 times, but it won't alleviate the fact that your post was 100% a homer post. Just accept it and move on.

Agree1 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 00:38:46
Also, you thinking the issue is that the Mets aren't getting enough shows how woefully you're missing the point.

Pittsburgh is not giving up Joe Musgrove for a bunch of nobody prospects.

That's like saying the Marlins could get Lucas Giolito for Harold Ramirez and Jon Berti. It's as outlandish and silly.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 00:46:01
Lastly, it's SIGNIFICANTLY more likely that the Pirates would get Andrew Vaughn for Joe Musgrove over the paltry, laughable, borderline contemptuous package you have Pittsburgh getting for him.

I'm not convinced Chicago would give up Vaughn, for what it's worth. And I don't blame them. But it's certainly what would and should be expected from Pittsburgh.

Also, for someone who bloviates about "surplus value" all the time, you conveniently seem to forget about it when it comes to your own team.

One calculator gave this rundown:
Musgrove: 39M
Nimmo: 26M
White Sox package: 9.5.

So either you don't believe in surplus, or you're an absolutely massive homer. Please let me know in the comments below which option it is.

Agree1 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 06:06:06
Statbook, I know it's been a long year, but you know what year it is, right? If they are free agents in 2023, that means they are signed through 21 and 22. So 2 seasons remaining. It's not after the 2023 season, it's before. Spotrac even has handy visualizations to make it easier for the easily confused. 17, 18, 19 were his pre-arb years. That extra year makes a big difference in his value. But yada, yada, yada, I know. You still think it's bad.

I'll amend and say Stiever, Thompson and Adolfo gets the ball rolling. 2 40+s and an upside-40 for mister budding ace after a nice 8 starts against the central divisons. Dyson got 2 low-end 40s and a 35.

Dylan Cease could also be in play, but I'm sure they want their new pitching PD staff to get a crack at him plus a new ML pitching coach eventually. If he improves the spin efficiency on his FB (albeit easier said than done), watch out. Or just start throwing a cutter when you already cut your 99 mph 4-seamer and pull a Corbin Burnes. He doesn't make a lot of sense for the Mets, but 5 years of him

Im also not missing the point by sending more to NY. They would sent a prospect to PIT that they like more. It's literally the point of a three team deal. Engel or even a guy like Matt Foster could bring immediate value to NY for which they'd part with a prospect.

So potentially:

NYM: Musgrove, Engel

CHW: Nimmo

PIT: Steiver, Thompson, Adolfo, and Thomas Szapucki

After all, it's the Mets getting the "budding ace".

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 16:52:36
I'll amend my statement to say that adding Stiever doesn't even begin to move the needle.

Since you love surplus value so much, I went in and adjusted the numbers to your newest proposal. Based on a few calculators you can find, here's some numbers I found:

Musgrove: 39.8
Nimmo: 26.4
Szapucki: 5.4
Stiever: 4.7
Engel: 5.0 (I'm being generous and changing it from a zero)
Thompson: 4.1
Adolfo: 3.0

So, if you're keeping track at home, here's how this all works out:

Pirates: Give up 39.8M, get 17.2M. They LOSE 22.6M in value.
Mets: Give up 31.8M, get 44.8. They GAIN 13.0M in value.
White Sox: Give up 16.8M, get 26.4M. They GAIN 9.6M in value.

Yeah, I'm not sure why the Pirates would want to give up the best player in that trade and also get the worst return in said trade.

The other factor is that I fudged the numbers to make Adam Engel more valuable than he probably is, simply out of knowing he could be valuable going forward. Also, we don't know how the teams actually value any of the players going forward, it could be higher, could be lower.

But the initial trade in no way even gets the needle moving.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 16:59:29
Now, if you substitute Cease for Stiever, it actually makes a lot of sense. But it's quite telling that the reasonable trade that makes sense is the concession trade for you.

The point in all of this is: for a guy who really gets quite arrogant about "surplus value", you seem to conveniently ignore it when it comes to your beloved White Sox.

I'm still waiting for your reply: do you not actually believe in surplus value numbers, or are you just a massive homer? Please respond in the comments below.

Agree0 Disagree0

23 Oct 2020 18:58:19
You pulling those numbers from baseballtradevalues. com does very little for your argument, I hope you understand that. That's not a few calculators, that's one. It's been a couple of offseasons now where we have established you don't understand surplus value in both baseball trades, nor it the basic sense of economics. It's not arrogant to reference it in trades when it's literally how buiness, in all sectors, is handled. It's a core principle of economics.

The biggest fallacy in a calculator like that is that they put every player on a uniform scale, as in they treat their values as if every team would value them exactly the same. For example, a 5-win projected player is much more valuable to a 88-projected win team than the 75-projected win team. So, does it recognize the position the Mets are in with their OFers and SPs? No. Does it recognize the small amount of "MTV" around Musgrove on the team? No. It's their "value" in a vacuum.

I'd guess a +/ - $10M confidence interval on those numbers if I ran accuracy diagnostics from previous years.

You don't even understand how team control works, go figure. But tell me more about surplus value.

Its ok though, you have a handy calculator to guide you; one that I'm sure GMs across to league reference throughout their discussions.

Agree0 Disagree1

23 Oct 2020 20:49:54
As much as I disagree with John Bitzer, his numbers are no better or worse than yours. Your valuation of Andrew Vaughn (55M) and his (45M) aren't that different. I'd imagine if you asked other experts, their number would fall somewhere between 40-50M. You obviously put a premium on his value because you like what team he plays for.

That being said, you may not like the numbers on guys like Stiever and others from Bitzer, but the margin of error is probably not going to make this suddenly a great trade for Pittsburgh. (Unless of course they are absolutely in love with one or several of those players) .

And your issue with Bitzer's site is exactly what you're doing. You're saying, "He's a very good pitcher, but isn't worth $55 million+ in surplus value". That's YOUR value (and likely not even one single GM's value, outside of maybe Rick Hahn) . And 39.8M likely isn't the value the Pirates have on Musgrove. Cherington's value is probably much higher.

Obviously team needs and situational context change the value on players. For what it's worth, I don't typically like those calculators, but it's one of the few that's readily available to attach a number to a player.

Can you agree that your "Vaughn is worth $55M" is a total guess? At one point, Christian Arroyo had a value of over 25M. He obviously never amounted to that. And at one point, Mike Yastrzemski had a value of 0. Now it's somewhere aroung 50-60M.

This is where the arrogance comes into play. Surplus value on prospects, especially, assumes that all of the scouting reports are correct.

I acknowledge the chance that someone like Jonathan Stiever or Micker Adolfo could be massive stars. I also acknowledge that they could be out of pro baseball in 3 years. We don't know.

But strangely enough, you insist that every young player that has ever been a part of the White Sox organization is a future Hall of Famer, and they always conveniently are valued at their 99th percentile projection. And when you don't like the values someone else places on them, you go on a tirade where you change the subject every other post because it's the only chance you might have to feel like you're still in the race.

Newsflash: I'm only talking to you because it's funny to get a rise out of you. I'm sitting in quarantine bored to tears and trolling you brings me a lot of comedic relief.

Now, enjoy watching your White Sox forever be Chicago's bridesmaid. Toodles.

Agree1 Disagree1

23 Oct 2020 21:53:38
You mean you are just trolling and don't actually believe the stuff you're spewing? Ya don't say.

My thing with Vaughn is, find me one scouting report that is skeptical of his hit and power tool. Literally one. Sox pitchers said all spring and summer camp that he was one, if not the toughest hitter for them to get out in inter-squads, and that's including all the ML guys. There's a reason why he wasn't moved for Lance Lynn at the deadline this year, and Lance Lynn is a better pitcher than someone like Musgrove. I'm high on him, yes. But so are many others across the industry.

Even as high as I am on Vaughn, I don't think I've ever seen a prospect lauded more than Vlad Jr., and he hasn't exactly hit the ground running based on the standards the industry set for him. He has some pretty significant launch angle issues that he needs to correct to hit his potential. Not to mention keeping his body in shape. Vaughn is no sure think because no prospect is a sure thing. $55 million was indeed an estimate for Vaughn, based on what 60-grade position players typically produce through their 6-years of control. It wasn't pulled out of my you-know-what. You presented the trade value. com stuff as the biblical word to trades.

I don't know why you think I'm in love with every Sox prospect. They have an average system currently, if that. That's why my thought to get creative was with this 3-teamer. The original one was light, I've conceded that. Getting a good RFer is not going to be easy for them, which is why there's a decent chance they end up with one of Pederson, Grossman, JBJ, or someone in that realm.

Nimmo may be the Mets' best option to trade out of their group, and the probability that they trade one of Nimmo, Conforto, Davis, Smith or McNiel jumps up even higher if there's no DH in the NL in 2021. The Pirates can bet on Musgrove to improve his stock further in the next half a year or another full one, but he may not get more valuable than right now. If it does take someone like Dylan Cease, a top-50 prospect a year ago who sits 99 mph on his FB (& like I said, a shape tweak away from it being an elite pitch) with 2 plus breaking balls and 5 years of control, the Sox consider it, depending on if they are confident enough in their plan for him moving forward as well as who they can land in free agency.

If we don't somewhat trust scouting reports while also considering each team's context, then what are we even doing on here?

Agree0 Disagree1

23 Oct 2020 22:48:28
Good grief kiddo. This is too funny.

I think you're in love with every scout because the moment I even slightly suggested that some teams might not hold a 55M value, you lose your ever-loving mind. It's hilarious to watch you slobber all over yourself trying to defend the White Sox so hard.

I mean, it's cute that one of their 8 remaining fans has stuck around this long. At least you'll be able to tell the other 400 bandwagons about it later on.

Anyhoo, I'll give you a call when the White Sox DFA Andrew Vaughn in 3 seasons to make room for J. A. Happ.

Until then, you can ask your dad what 2005 was like and what it was like watching the worst World Series champions in recent history.

Now, back to Spanish homework. Mom says you have a C in it.

Agree1 Disagree0

24 Oct 2020 07:10:48
The team that went 11-1 in the postseason, knocked out the previous 2 defending champions, and had a starting staff throw 4 STRAIGHT COMPLETE GAMES was "the worst World Series champions in recent history. " We won't see a team every go 11-1 in the postseason in a very long time, possibly not ever again.

Since you like wagers, I'd bet the house that the Sox win more games than the Giants over the next 5 seasons. Farhan should be able to "wave his magic wand" by then, right? And since the Sox are the "bridesmaids of Chicago", I'd do the same bet for the Cubs. How about the Bay Area? Do the Giants win more than the A's in the next 5 seasons? Good luck with that. Who's really the bridesmaid? Have fun getting hyped over Donovan Solano over the next few years. Super exciting stuff.

I'll say it again, Zaidi says his prayers every night hoping to build a core as good as Rick Hahn did. They have a very, very long way to go, but lucky for you they have a solid guy that has a chance to get them back to contention.

Do all of us a favor and stick to the trade discussion. The frustrated attempts at personal attacks are a waste of time. But we've learned that's the only possible route when people present compelling facts that tend to hurt your narratives. The whole "kiddo" thing is getting a little weird, I might add.

Agree0 Disagree0

24 Oct 2020 15:52:31
"Do all of us a favor and stick to the trade discussion. The frustrated attempts at personal attacks are a waste of time. "

Kind of difficult to do when any disagreement with you makes you go into overdrive. You can't handle someone who doesn't act like a raging White Sox homer along with you.

So you make up nonsensical "surplus value" numbers that are all ridiculously high. Then, when someone else throws out numbers, they are conveniently "from the wrong source" (meanwhile, you fail to even source yours) .

And then, to cap it off, you insist on bringing up comments from THREE YEARS AGO. Seriously. You can't let that one go, can you? If you're adamant that I don't take up any space in your head, then quit bringing it up.

Moral of the story, you want people to "stick to trade discussions", but you can't handle those conversations. You can't handle anyone disagreeing with you. Because you're a child. And until you stop acting like a child, I will continue calling you one.

Hopefully mom buys you that Luis Robert jersey for Christmas. Helpful hint: Wash the dishes a few times. That'll make her love you more.

Let me know when you're ready to be disagreed with and then we can talk baseball. Capeesh?

Agree0 Disagree0

24 Oct 2020 17:42:11
The surplus estimates are my own. Believe it or not, people can think for themselves. But again, me throwing a value out for Vaughn was a vague estimate, not a presentation of absolute value as you did. That calculator will always leave out important context. It also had a bunch of missing, wrong, or outdated information.

I have been consistently sticking to trade talk, but then you keep brining up my parents and calling the 05 Sox a bad team. It couldn't be more off topic. Then when you're wrong about things (Nimmo/ Musgrove control and knowing how player control works, the 05 Sox not actually being a bad team, the White Sox rebuild looking pretty darn good, etc. ), the topic is conveniently dropped.

I'm no more of a raging homer than you are. Evan Longoria for a top-100 prospect? Saying he's not been a terrible deal for SF? Saying the Giants will win 3 more before the Sox win 1? Zaidi having a magic wand? Seriously, look in the mirror.

You can't say something as dumb as "Hopefully mom buys you that Luis Robert jersey for Christmas. Helpful hint: Wash the dishes a few times. That'll make her love you more. " and then call me a child. It makes no sense. It's just flat out rude and weird. There's never been a more childish response on this site. But I'd imagine if this wasn't an anonymous forum, your style would suddenly change.

Agree0 Disagree0

04 Oct 2020 00:57:41
HerE second trade of day braces and Astros

Astros get
3b Austin Riley
Rp Luke Jackson
Braces prospects
30# c Alex Jackson
8# LP Tucker Davison
11 Rp Freddy Tarnok
13# of Greyson Jenista
31# 1b Braxton Davidson

Braces get
3b Alex Bregman
Sp Zack Greinke
Rp Lance McCullers

Astros get
Young 3b to replace bregman , plus bull pen help , two top prospect pitching arm. , young c who just need Chance top of prospect and young 1b

Braves get super star 3b ,
They get vet starter who in past has been link to braves and I think Braves could convert McCullers to there closer

Believable0 Unbelievable6

05 Oct 2020 21:27:14
Hey, let's get the Braves a superstar 3B while giving up not a single one of our young, MLB-ready starters, not one elite prospect, or really anyone of significant value.

Awfully convenient strategy. Hope it works out for you.

Agree4 Disagree1

04 Oct 2020 00:35:44
Ok here is three team block buster for you. I know won't happen before all try to put me down but it trade with Braves , Indians , Rockies

Rockies would get
3B Jose Ramirez
If Johan Camargo
Of Bradley Zimmer
SP Zack Pleasac
Braves prospects
29 prospect C Alex Jackson
23 Prospect Rp Huscar Ynoa
11 Prospect. Rp Freddy Tarnok
8 Prospect. LP Tucker Davidson

Indians get
3B Austin Riley
SS Dansby Swanson
Of Adam Duval
Rp Luke Jackson
Sp Jon Gray
Ss/2b Branden Rodgers
Braves prospect
12 Of Micheal Harris
13 Rp Patrick Weigal
20 Greyson Jenista

Braces get
3b Nolan Arenado
SS Francisco Lindor
SP Shane Bieber
LP Brad Hand

Believable0 Unbelievable5

05 Oct 2020 17:25:25
Nice to see comedy's back.

Agree3 Disagree0

05 Oct 2020 21:29:18
Just your average, every-day, run-of the mill 21 player trade.

The Braves get Arenado, Bieber, AND Lindor. and the best player they give up is Austin Riley?

I think it's time to turn off the XBox and get back to your homework.

Agree4 Disagree1

03 Oct 2020 03:40:37

To MIL: Lourdes Gurriel Jr, TJ Zeuch, Eric Pardinho
To TOR: Brandon Woodruff

To STL: Tanner Roark, Reese Mcguire
To TOR: Juan Yepez

Sign Andrelton Simmons 3yr/ 45mil
Re-sign Taijuan Walker 2 yr/ 24mil
Re-sign Matt Shoemaker 1yr/ 7mil

Starting Lineup
C: Danny Jansen
1B: Vlad Guerrero Jr
2B: Bo Bichette
SS: Andrelton Simmons
3B: Jordan Groshans
LF: Teoscar Hernandez
CF: Cavan Bigio
RF: Randal Grichuk
DH: Alejandro Kirk

Santiago Espinal
Rowdy Tellez
Juan Yepez
Jonathon Davis

Starting Pitchers
1: Brandon Woodruff
2: Hyun-Jin-Ryu
3: Nate Pearson
4: Taijuan Walker
5: Matt Shoemaker

CL: Jordan Romano
Anthony Bass
Rafael Dolis
Ryan Borucki
Sean Reid-Foley
Julian Merryweather
AJ Cole
Trent Thornton


Believable1 Unbelievable4

05 Oct 2020 17:02:27
Alejandro Kirk is the 2020 version of Jeremy Hazelbaker. We'll all look back and think "wasn't that adorable? ".

The dude hit one home run and everyone thinks we should slot him into future lineups as a main player. I'd temper your expectations, quite a bit.

Agree4 Disagree0

01 Oct 2020 20:53:45
NY METS Offseason

With Cohen on board and $$$ coming off the books the Mets are in a prime position to spend.

Offseason Moves

Extend Michael Conforto

Sign Trevor Bauer
6 years $150 million

Sign JT Realmuto
4 years $115 million

Sign Marcus Stroman
3 years $60 million

Sign Liam Hendricks
3 year $48 million

Sign Kevin Pillar

Lineup / depth
1. Nimmo CF
2. McNeil LF
3. JT Realmuto C
4. Conforto RF
5. Alonso DH
6. D. Smith 1b
7. Cano 2b
8. JD Davis 3b
9. Gimenez / Rosario SS

SS - Rosario
INF - Luis Guillorme
3b / 1b - Frazier
OF - Mareznick
OF - Pillar
C -

D. Peterson

M. Castro
Betances (assuming he takes option)
E. Ramirez

Believable0 Unbelievable3

05 Oct 2020 17:09:45
I could see the Mets deciding to spend with a new owner trying to make a splash. But I'm guessing he's not adding $375M in future salaries in year one (not including a Conforto extension) .

Based on the AAV, you're talking over 150M before any arbitration salaries come into play.

So not factoring in Conforto's extension, arb payments to Diaz, Matz, Nimmo, Lugo, Davis, Rosario, and others, you're nearing the 200M threshold fairly quickly.

And considering they'll likely need to add more money at the deadline if they hope to contend in 2021, I doubt Cohen wants to be paying luxury tax in Year 1.

Agree0 Disagree1

26 Sep 2020 10:58:57
Let's try this a different way.. in the past, postings were agreed or disagreed based up a single posting. How about this narrative: The Indians have traded away three LEAGUE level aces over the past two seasons. Will there be a third?.

Who wants to offer what for Shane Bieber?

Yankees?.. Braves?..

B-prospects and AAAA players won't get the job done..


Believable0 Unbelievable0

26 Sep 2020 22:16:01
Doesn't even rise to the level of a rumor.

Agree2 Disagree1

05 Oct 2020 17:10:28
At this point? It'll probably require Ronald Acuna.

Which means a trade would never happen.

Agree0 Disagree0

MLB Rumors 2

MLB Trade Rumors 3

MLB Rumors 4

Cell phone only version of this site:

Log In or Register to post

Remember me

Forgot Pass