MLB Trade Rumors Member Posts

 

huskers's Profile

Current Avatar:
huskers's Avatar

No Profile Picture uploaded

Team:


Where from: Nebraska


Favourite player: Honus Wagner


Best team moment:


Interests:


Timezone:




huskers's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To huskers's Posts

 

 

To huskers's last 5 talk posts

 

To huskers's last 5 rumour replies

 

To huskers's last 5 talk replies

 

huskers has no Rumours Posts

 

 

huskers's talk posts with other poster's replies to huskers's talk posts

 

21 Dec 2016 05:27:45
Acceptable returns for Jose Quintana. If I'm Chicago, I don't move Quintana unless it's somewhere along these lines:

From New York: Gleyber Torres + Clint Frazier + 2-3 low tier prospects (I really don't care who, just any guys that those teams would target) .

From Houston: Francis Martes + A. J. Reed + Joe Musgrove or David Paulino

From Texas: Joey Gallo, Yohander Mendez, Andy Ibanez, 1-2 low-tier prospects.

From Seattle: Tyler O'Neill or Kyle Lewis + Luiz Gohara, Max Povse

From LA Dodgers: Julio Urias + Cody Bellinger or Alex Verdugo

From Atlanta: Sean Newcomb + Ozzie Albies + Kolby Allard

From Washington: Joe Ross + Victor Robles + Erick Fedde

From Colorado: David Dahl + Ryan McMahon + Jeff Hoffman

From Miami: Marcell Ozuna + Luis Castillo + Braxton Garrett or Tyler Kolek

Quintana has been one of the best pitchers in all of baseball and has one of the most team-friendly deals around. It's going to take the world and more to acquire him.

huskers

1.) 21 Dec 2016 14:58:10
You really have over valued Quintana in a lot of these like most aren't good at all.


2.) 21 Dec 2016 15:21:26
In what way? Quintana likely has far more value than Sale due to his contract. Besides, I doubt he gets moved this winter.


3.) 21 Dec 2016 15:37:52
Jose Quintana, or Clayton Kershaw?


4.) 21 Dec 2016 16:22:03
Yanks give up too much.


5.) 21 Dec 2016 20:41:43
Quintana actually has more trade value than Kershaw, thanks to his contract. Nobody is touching that Kershaw contract.

And Zammer, the Yankees probably give up the worst package, behind the Mariners.


6.) 21 Dec 2016 20:58:13
Haha, Kershaw is the best pitcher on the planet.


7.) 21 Dec 2016 21:56:48
Who is better and who is more valuable are not the same thing.

Kershaw is the best pitcher in baseball. That doesn't make him the most valuable. He makes $34M and has had some injuries recently, plus, he can opt out of his contract and become a free agent soon. Not many teams can afford that contract AND give up young talent/ prospects for Kershaw.


8.) 21 Dec 2016 22:14:34
K yup Huskers you lost all credibility with "Quintana has more trade value than Kershaw thanks to his contract" that is the dumbest thing anyone has ever said on this site. While Quintana is good he's not even close to being on the level of Kershaw no one is. And if we're going to talk contract, does that mean Archer has more value than Quintana and Kershaw cause Archer has a much more team friendly deal. What about Urias? He's under contract for a while, and won't be making much at all since he's going to be under team control, does that mean he is one of the most valuable pitchers in the world?


9.) 21 Dec 2016 22:57:43
Wow, well said mamba. ^.


10.) 22 Dec 2016 02:03:52
K, yup, considering Dave Cameron at Fangraphs didn't even list Kershaw in his Top 50 Trade Values back in July/ August, but yeah, so stupid! I'm guessing Dave Cameron has no credibility whatsoever.

Archer is at 21, Quintana 25, Urias 36. So yes, based on Cameron's opinion, as well as mine, all of those guys have more trade value than Kershaw.

Kershaw makes $34M a year. Very few teams can afford that. In fact, maybe the Dodgers and Yankees could honestly afford that. Add to it the glut of prospects that would have to go to LA, literally 0 teams could trade for Clayton Kershaw. Add to it the fact he can void his contract the year after he's traded, no one is doing that deal for a rental.

But what do I know? Dave Cameron is such an idiot, as am I, apparently.


11.) 22 Dec 2016 07:34:49
Oh back in July/ August when Kershaw was out with a serious back injury? When healthy Kershaw is the second most valuable player behind Trout. Other than Kershaws rookie season he has not posted an ERA OVER 2.91 since 2011 his highest ERA was 2.50. While ERA isn't everything he will easily end up being the greatest pitcher of all time! There's literally no debate if he can stay healthy. To say Kershaw isn't in the top 50 trade value because of his CONTRACT, were not talking about his performance WERE TALKING ABOUT HIS CONTRACT! By your logic Trout shouldn't be in top 50 either because he makes tons of money, I'm willing to guess you'd disagree and say he is.

You look at the production Archer, Quintana, Kershaw, Urias have put up in the past 5 years Kershaw is so far above them, Urias hasn't EVEN STARTED FOR A FULL SEASON IN THE MAJORS, and you're saying he's more valuable than Kershaw. I have a feeling you have no clue what trade value is, because Kershaw is so good no team has the assets to trade for him. Kershaw would bring back the biggest return aside from Trout therefore he has the second highest trade value

Congrats you just replaced Sull as the worst on this site.


12.) 22 Dec 2016 12:52:06
Here, I'll do the work for you:

"Yeah, I’m giving Kershaw his own category; he’s that good. Even at $33 million a year, Kershaw is a huge bargain, but his contract makes him all but untradeable. While the Dodgers didn’t give him a full no-trade clause, they did put a poison pill in the deal; in any season that he’s traded, he then has the right to void the deal at the end of the season, so any acquiring team is only picking up a rental. As great as Kershaw is, he’s not going to command a premium return from a team that would only get him for one year. "

He's a rental the moment he is traded. I would argue his $30+M deal also makes him untradeable.

None of this means teams don't want him. I never said that. So you're arguing against the wind. I guess you can always win a debate against the wind.


13.) 22 Dec 2016 12:45:55
How about you go and read that Fangraphs article instead of assuming you know what people mean. You clearly don't comprehend what trade value means or how it works.

Please do yourself, myself, and your wee little brain a favor and read it. Then come back educated. You'll have all the questions you just posited answered.


14.) 22 Dec 2016 14:24:06
The yanks will not give up torres.


15.) 22 Dec 2016 14:57:47
I'm not "arguing against the wind" as you said. You literally said Kershaw has no trade value! And this is a quote from the first article "the list is an attempt to answer the question of who would bring back the most in trade for their team if they were to be put on the market and made available before the deadline" you're telling me if the Dodgers wanted to sell Kershaw at the deadline they wouldn't get the biggest haul? Like you said he's on his own level, and the 30 plus million salary goes way down when 2/ 3 of the season has passed, he does have an opt out but there's no promise he'll opt out, any team at the deadline that is in contention and desperate will give up whatever is necessary to bring in a title, we saw it last year with the Cubs. If he gets traded and doesn't opt out, a team won't just go oh he's making 30M plus next season we can't afford that, before acquiring a huge piece like Kershaw a team would make sure it'd be able to handle his contract for years to come.


16.) 22 Dec 2016 16:16:12
Tell me: what package would you say a team has to give for Kershaw? It would have to be much more than Chapman. Heck, it would be in Trout territory. Who is givinh that up for 10-15 starts? Honestly.

And yes, Kershaw, barring a major injury, will opt out. He's already way under paid.

This is why Kershaw is untradeable. The Dodgers aren't taking a discount and no one is paying the largest price ever for a rental. No one.

He is, for all intents and purposes, untradeable, mostly because he's a rental the moment he gets traded.


17.) 22 Dec 2016 16:19:44
For what it's worth, without that opt out stipulation, Kershaw jumps to #2 on that list.

This wasn't that difficult. Or if it were, perhaps you should refrain from insulting people when you can't grasp simple concepts.


18.) 23 Dec 2016 00:11:04
You literally just agreed with me, All I've said is Kershaw is number 2 and this whole time you've said he isn't, but now you literally repeated what I said a couple days ago. Trying to put others down because you know you're wrong, and it's absurd to say Kershaw isn't tradable if the dodgers wanted to trade him they absolutely could and get a great return. And I think if Kershaw gets traded and that team wins the title he'd be willing to discuss an extension or not opt out it's not rocket science.


19.) 23 Dec 2016 01:09:57
No, I've said that under his current contract, he is untradeable. IF he didn't have that stipulation, he's #2 on the list. However, he does have it, thus, refer to the first sentence.

Name me ONE team who would give up a fair deal for Kershaw for a rental. Just one. Please, enlighten me. Kershaw would command a Mike Trout type of return, and no one, literally ZERO teams are trading that for a rental, even with the non-existent chance of him signing an extension. He added that stipulation for the very fact that he wants to be paid handsomely. He's not going to limit himself to one team's worth of negotiations.


20.) 23 Dec 2016 01:10:45
Also, based on your inability to actually read anything I've said (i. e. you thinking I agreed with you), I would say this is rocket science for you.


 

 

07 Dec 2016 22:38:05
Can we all take a minute to admire what the White Sox are doing.

Still have Quintana, Abreu, Frazier. Could wind up with 5-6 more top prospects.

huskers

1.) 07 Dec 2016 23:02:54
They prevented themselves from becoming the next Tigers/ Phillies. If they trade those 3 which I feel is a good chance they will they'll have the best farm in the game.


2.) 08 Dec 2016 01:13:10
Don't forget about Robertson he should bring back a good amount. But they would need to compete with the Cubs, Astros, Red Sox as the best farms in the league.


3.) 08 Dec 2016 12:39:09
Cubs have a good farm? Nope all their really good "prospects" are in the majors, they're only 2 or 3 deep. Red Sox farm is significantly worse than at the start of the offseason, Astros don't have that deep of a farm either. Not to mention you left out teams with great farm systems like the Rockies, Yankees, Brewers, Phillies, Braves.

Tell me how adding 5 really good prospects, including the number 1 overall and 3 overall doesn't make a team the best?


 

 

 

huskers's rumour replies

 

Click To View This Thread

13 Jan 2017 21:15:58
^^^Batman just does it to bully people on this site. Don't apologize or waste your energy explaining. He'd rather troll you.

huskers

 

 

Click To View This Thread

12 Jan 2017 23:18:17
BuccoFan21, then the Pirates won't get anyone of any significance, especially not Quintana.

I hope they keep Meadows. That way in 2-3 years, they can be passed by the Brewers in the NL Central and be forever in 4th place in that division.

huskers

 

 

Click To View This Thread

12 Jan 2017 18:14:07
Blue Jays fans continually prove they would rather watch the ship sink than see a winning team, or at least a competitive team, put together.

If Pompey were as good as Gardner, the Blue Jays wouldn't be in desperate search for an OF right now.

huskers

 

 

Click To View This Thread

12 Jan 2017 18:11:42
The question is: are the Mets willing to pay him?

He opted out of his contract in lieu of arbitration, and is set to be compensated very well. Do the Mets want to handcuff themselves to a guy set to make $10+ million over the next 3 arbitration cycles?

huskers

 

 

Click To View This Thread

11 Jan 2017 19:50:24
Here we go again.

If I had a dollar for every time you mentioned the "Strickland for Headley" trade, I could buy the Oakland Athletics.

Please, stop.

huskers

 

 

 

huskers's talk replies