July 15, 2017 at 6:18 pm #27673
This comes from my friend Craig Mish of SiriusXM. He resides in South Florida and has contacts.
News : Teams are calling Marlins on Stanton. Belief is he may be willing to waive no trade clause. Showing most interest : SF Giants
— Craig Mish (@CraigMish) July 15, 2017
More : Cardinals also checked in. Stanton does not want to be part of rebuild. Been told prefers to stay if team stays together.
— Craig Mish (@CraigMish) July 15, 2017
To clarify Stanton does not want to be part of rebuild if that is case in Miami. Not saying Cardinals are rebuilding. Just that they called.
— Craig Mish (@CraigMish) July 15, 2017July 15, 2017 at 7:15 pm #27675BrianpnoonanParticipantFree
He will opt out after three years.
This end result just depends on a lot of things. Has every potential to be a positive if it happens. Ancillary deals will count if we do make a splash. Cant judge this in a vacuum.July 15, 2017 at 7:15 pm #27677stlcard25ParticipantPaid - Annual
Stanton would certainly be an upgrade over Piscotty but…at that price? Given Dewitt’s comments about not signing Robert due to the strain on the budget, I highly doubt they would take on the risk of $35 million for a 35+ year old. Maybe if they knew for sure he was gonna take the opt out.July 15, 2017 at 8:56 pm #27689forsch31ParticipantFree
Given the way the salaries have escalated in MLB, $35 million may be like $20 million today when Stanton is 35 years old.July 15, 2017 at 9:09 pm #27690LoganAlpha30X7ParticipantFree
I would at the very least kick the tires on a trade like this, as long as they didn’t want a terrible amount I’d go for it and if not him then Trout, otherwise it’d just be the front office trying to make a trade just to make one…July 15, 2017 at 11:53 pm #27695858booyahParticipantFree
He would opt out after 2020 and the only way he wouldn’t is if he had a demise like Heyward. Getting him for 3 seasons at that price would be worth certain prospects. YOu’d almost make a top 5 prospects you wouldn’t trade and then start from there.
I would say the Giants are the favorite. He’s a Cali guy but lets see what they can offer.July 16, 2017 at 9:03 am #27703bicyclemikeModeratorPaid - Annual
The Cardinals are in a bit of a bind for the time being, as two of the guys they would consider sending to Miami as part of a deal for Stanton are on the DL (Grichuk and Piscotty).
Most anyone would love to add Stanton to their lineup, although he has struggled some this year. But he’s a legitimate power hitter, one who will no doubt have a career year in the next few years. The question of course is how much do you carve out of your farm system, and how much stress do you add to the salary budget to make it happen?
Management will need to assess the risk and potential rewards, and decide if they can be a player in a deal like this.July 16, 2017 at 9:33 am #27706Bw52ParticipantPaid - Annual
I really doubt Cards FO would make a deal like Stanton.Too much money and cost too much in players and prospects.That`s not Mo and Managements style.too risky and too costly.Not happening.I still say a deal for a Lucas Duda or Logan Morrison type player will be about as big a risk Cards make.July 16, 2017 at 12:18 pm #27715OnyxgemParticipantFree
So in other words if those two players are best cards would trade for then they don’t care if they make playoffs or notJuly 16, 2017 at 1:29 pm #27716bccranParticipantFree
Cardinals nearly always look for solutions that provide short term help with long term potential.
Like a Matt Holliday. Would look for that type of scenario.July 16, 2017 at 2:57 pm #27722blingboyParticipantPaid - Annual
BDW only ponied up for Holliday because of the need to protect Pujols in the lineup. He would not take on Stanton even if the team was that one piece away, which is not the case.July 16, 2017 at 3:27 pm #27725gscottarParticipantPaid - Annual
I think the Cards are actually interested and motivated to do a deal for Stanton. When you look at some of the contracts being thrown around for guys like Upton, Cespedes, etc…, Stanton’s contract might not look so bad in a few years.
I think the big hurdle right now is Miami’s ownership status is in a big pile of limbo. I doubt a big deal like Stanton can be approved until their ownership status is resolved and who knows when that will be.July 16, 2017 at 4:37 pm #27743
Why would they add another team’s Matt Adams when they just got rid of their own?July 16, 2017 at 4:39 pm #27744
Excellent point about Miami ownership. Why would Loria risk making a trade that could mess up his deal to sell the team for top dollar?July 16, 2017 at 5:05 pm #27745Cardinals2016ParticipantFree
Because financial valuations of companies are based on expected future cash flows.
Miami is on pace to lose $60+ million this year. $500 million of the purchase price is going to pay off existing debt. Their are $488 million in future obligations, nearly $300 million of which are due to Stanton. Stanton’s contract increases nearly $10 million next year.
So, the question is:
Are the Marlins worth more with or without Stanton and his $25+ million per year contract?
Given they are losing nearly $60 million this year, from a cash flow perspective, they will be worth more without Stanton’s contract.July 16, 2017 at 6:56 pm #27750blingboyParticipantPaid - Annual
Yeah, I would think the Marlins franchise is worth more without that contract.July 16, 2017 at 8:36 pm #27753RatsbuddyParticipantFree
I respect your opinion so I am wondering what you think the chances are that the Redbirds trade for Stanton? All you usually get on threads like this are opinions.
Anyway, what are the odds, more or less than a 50% chance? I am going to assume about a 10% chance myself.
r/RatJuly 16, 2017 at 9:09 pm #27758
Yes, I would go with your 10%, with it probably on the high side. But that is just a guess. I will be with the team this week in NY so will be able to test the vibe then.July 17, 2017 at 8:20 am #27775July 17, 2017 at 1:37 pm #27803RatsbuddyParticipantFree
Piscotty, Grichuk, and Weaver for Stanton.
There’s your offer Miami. Now send Stanton to the Big Apple asap.
r/RatJuly 17, 2017 at 3:01 pm #27809mudvilleParticipantPaid - Annual
You could get Stanton even up for Grichuk. But you will have to pay all of the following money to him.
2017 27 Miami Marlins $14,500,000 6.118
2018 28 Miami Marlins $25,000,000
2019 29 Miami Marlins $26,000,000
2020 30 Miami Marlins $26,000,000 may opt out of contract following 2020 season
2021 31 Miami Marlins $29,000,000
2022 32 Miami Marlins $29,000,000
2023 33 Miami Marlins $32,000,000
2024 34 Miami Marlins $32,000,000
2025 35 Miami Marlins $32,000,000
2026 36 Miami Marlins $29,000,000
2027 37 Miami Marlins $25,000,000
2028 38 Miami Marlins *$25,000,000 $25M Team Option, $10M Buyout
If there is a recession, or if attendance falls off a cliff, you still have to pay him….every penny until he’s 37 years old. Then, for a measly $10M you can be excused from having to pay him the final $25M at the age of 38. And, BTW, he only plays for 120 games per year on average.July 17, 2017 at 5:43 pm #27821TexasCardParticipantFree
You can get him on August 1 for no player at all. Simply be willing to claim all of that future money. If you aren’t willing to do that then end of this thread.July 17, 2017 at 7:04 pm #27824858booyahParticipantFree
Actually you’d still have to give them something unless they just let him go and even in that Scenario the Giants would appear to have the upper hand. Worse record and all.
Which is why if there’s for real interest It might be smart to sweeten the pot with a couple prospects. I think the Marlins would rather do that that just go down to the waiver wire and get less if teams know the Marlins are bleeding out a bit.July 17, 2017 at 7:42 pm #27835TexasCardParticipantFree
Actually I know all of that but I don’t know that it would be wise to invest in that contract. It’s a dicey deal and there will be others out there in the off-season that may be better fits.July 17, 2017 at 7:46 pm #27837bicyclemikeModeratorPaid - Annual
I don’t think it is possible for any team to justify that contract.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.