Michael, you might recall I have been a fan of yours for some time. We usually agree. But I take issue with this statement: There are almost no clubs who win the World Series with store-bought starting pitching. I Know you qualified it later in the post, but the Dodgers have won two straight World Series with store bought pitchers. In fact, they stocked the store so full that pitchers were falling off the shelves and onto the floor. You can make an argument that the 2023 Rangers had key FA pitchers.
Having said that, I agree with your cautious approach to this year's FA pitching market and think they should make a "blow them away" offer to the Tigers.
If Skubal is available (he’s also a Boras client)( bodes well as him and Cohen like each other) the trade must include a 72 hr window to sign him to a deal. To me McClean and Benge are off limits. The Mets have pitching talent coming all the way from AA. I’d say even lower as the A Cyclones won their season championship. If that doesn’t happen I look to Kirby in Seattle. He would be my next choice and DePoto loves to deal. Seattle has a lot of pitching coming up for big deals and Kirby can be had too. I like the King signing and is also look at Cease. I feel too the Mets might already have an ace in McClean. His small sample this past season showed me a lot. I was wowed the way he makes that ball move. I’m
Not sure I’ve ever seen anyone move the ball the way he can. This team needs run prevention. Stearns said it 12 times in his end of the season press conference. That starts with great starting pitching. Period.
I'm not against trading away from the farm. I'm against overpaying for a rental. People are suggesting comps that have the Mets giving up more than has ever been given up for a 1 year off season rental in history. (well at least for the last 35 years or so from the research I was doing). You simply can't find examples of teams jettisoning multiple top 50 guys for a year rental....because its a terrible move.
Crochet, Burnes, Soto, Betts...none of these guys went for anything close to what has been suggested by numerous outlets for Skubal...and these are just recent comps....you can go back further...its rarely two top 100 guys and when it is its usually not a guy in the top 50.
Even the great Santana only went for a 62 ranked guy (Gomez) and a 100ish ranked guy....but the whole deal was contingent on an extension....so not a rental.
I'm patient. I don't need the most shiny new thing every year. I want long term success. Sign him next year or make a different move that doesnt decimate the system you spent so much time building. They FINALLY have a group of prospects ready or close to ready to contribute at the MLB leval as early as this season. If you need to deal some of them...deal for positions of need that you can control for more than a year...or deal fewer less elite prospects for rentals.
Big time hyperbole: "Every single owner in this sport can afford to sign every single player, no matter what they say. They’re all billionaires,..." Not according to this:
Separate subject: if you're the Tigers, why trade Skubal? They're a contending team, you know. If they're not in the hunt later on, they can trade him during the season and probably get a similar haul to what they'd get now. I also think it would be a huge mistake to give up the farm based on what is only a hope that you can sign him long term. Imagine they sent the Tigers 5 of our best and we go out in the wild card round next year and Skubal is signed by the Dodgers or Toronto. The pundits would have Stearns's head on a pike!
They might actually get more by waiting. When researching teams gave up more for 2 month rentals than they did for 1 year rentals. Honestly you simply just don't find teams giving up big hauls for 1 year rentals. I dont expect Stearns to buck the trend of paying more than any other team has in history for a rental just to make a splash.
I assume because there are less options at the trade deadline than their are in the offseason and more people competing for them. Not to mention if you know you are playoff bound or close to it with 2 months left teams seem more willing to take the risk.
That reminds me: how often does it happen that baseball teams make a deal that is contingent on one club getting the big name (e.g., Skubal) to sign an extension (the 72 hour window suggestion in James Schwartz's post)?
Most of them had partial or full no trade clauses and would only waive the no trade with extension (Glasnow, Granderson, Lee). So effectively the player was demanding the extension
So Santana was really the only example where the acquiring team was requiring the extension from what I can find.
Michael, you might recall I have been a fan of yours for some time. We usually agree. But I take issue with this statement: There are almost no clubs who win the World Series with store-bought starting pitching. I Know you qualified it later in the post, but the Dodgers have won two straight World Series with store bought pitchers. In fact, they stocked the store so full that pitchers were falling off the shelves and onto the floor. You can make an argument that the 2023 Rangers had key FA pitchers.
Having said that, I agree with your cautious approach to this year's FA pitching market and think they should make a "blow them away" offer to the Tigers.
If Skubal is available (he’s also a Boras client)( bodes well as him and Cohen like each other) the trade must include a 72 hr window to sign him to a deal. To me McClean and Benge are off limits. The Mets have pitching talent coming all the way from AA. I’d say even lower as the A Cyclones won their season championship. If that doesn’t happen I look to Kirby in Seattle. He would be my next choice and DePoto loves to deal. Seattle has a lot of pitching coming up for big deals and Kirby can be had too. I like the King signing and is also look at Cease. I feel too the Mets might already have an ace in McClean. His small sample this past season showed me a lot. I was wowed the way he makes that ball move. I’m
Not sure I’ve ever seen anyone move the ball the way he can. This team needs run prevention. Stearns said it 12 times in his end of the season press conference. That starts with great starting pitching. Period.
The 72 hour window idea is spot-on. McLean's potential is immense and absolutely off limits to trade him!
I'm not against trading away from the farm. I'm against overpaying for a rental. People are suggesting comps that have the Mets giving up more than has ever been given up for a 1 year off season rental in history. (well at least for the last 35 years or so from the research I was doing). You simply can't find examples of teams jettisoning multiple top 50 guys for a year rental....because its a terrible move.
Crochet, Burnes, Soto, Betts...none of these guys went for anything close to what has been suggested by numerous outlets for Skubal...and these are just recent comps....you can go back further...its rarely two top 100 guys and when it is its usually not a guy in the top 50.
Even the great Santana only went for a 62 ranked guy (Gomez) and a 100ish ranked guy....but the whole deal was contingent on an extension....so not a rental.
I'm patient. I don't need the most shiny new thing every year. I want long term success. Sign him next year or make a different move that doesnt decimate the system you spent so much time building. They FINALLY have a group of prospects ready or close to ready to contribute at the MLB leval as early as this season. If you need to deal some of them...deal for positions of need that you can control for more than a year...or deal fewer less elite prospects for rentals.
Big time hyperbole: "Every single owner in this sport can afford to sign every single player, no matter what they say. They’re all billionaires,..." Not according to this:
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/12/mlb-owners-net-worth.html.
Separate subject: if you're the Tigers, why trade Skubal? They're a contending team, you know. If they're not in the hunt later on, they can trade him during the season and probably get a similar haul to what they'd get now. I also think it would be a huge mistake to give up the farm based on what is only a hope that you can sign him long term. Imagine they sent the Tigers 5 of our best and we go out in the wild card round next year and Skubal is signed by the Dodgers or Toronto. The pundits would have Stearns's head on a pike!
They might actually get more by waiting. When researching teams gave up more for 2 month rentals than they did for 1 year rentals. Honestly you simply just don't find teams giving up big hauls for 1 year rentals. I dont expect Stearns to buck the trend of paying more than any other team has in history for a rental just to make a splash.
I assume because there are less options at the trade deadline than their are in the offseason and more people competing for them. Not to mention if you know you are playoff bound or close to it with 2 months left teams seem more willing to take the risk.
That reminds me: how often does it happen that baseball teams make a deal that is contingent on one club getting the big name (e.g., Skubal) to sign an extension (the 72 hour window suggestion in James Schwartz's post)?
So I was just researching with AI....since 2000
Santana
Granderson
Glasnow
Lee
Most of them had partial or full no trade clauses and would only waive the no trade with extension (Glasnow, Granderson, Lee). So effectively the player was demanding the extension
So Santana was really the only example where the acquiring team was requiring the extension from what I can find.
So yeah....this is rare stuff.
Appreciate it.