You are viewing the chat in desktop mode. Click here to switch to mobile view.
X
MLBTR Live Chat
powered byJotCast
Prev Page View Full Chat
Jeffrey Todd
9:41
Dyson. Younger, probably better, one more year of control. And I believe he's a bit cheaper, actually, after Watson's escalators are accounted for.
Tom
9:43
Clint Frazier & deivi Garcia Domingo German for Jacob Degrom ?
Jeffrey Todd
9:44
When you put it that way ... feels hard for the Mets to deal him. I mean, there's a nice mix of talent there, to be sure. But how can you move the franchise icon when you may not feel great that at least one of those guys is a future star?
9:45
Maybe the Mets love one or more of those players. I don't know. But I can easily imagine them only being willing to talk about ludicrous returns, reasoning that there is simply no other ace out there that can be had.
(Beyond the NYC dynamic.)
9:46
That's what actually makes me think everyone is sleeping on Greinke. The further we go on his contract, the more palatable the rest of it seems, because he hasn't broken down and is still excellent. He's not deGrom right now, but he's still really really good. And the DBacks really need to open their payroll back up.
9:47
Couple more and I have to run ...
Little Ross
9:47
Why havent I had any extension talks with Stromans camp? Wouldn't I be smart to at least look into an extension so I can have at least 1 MLB arm locked up for the future?
Jeffrey Todd
9:48
He's too close to free agency, they have too many needs and too young a talent base. I say cash him in via trade.
(Too close to FA = price will be relatively high.)
Zac
9:48
If someone with deferred money in their contract is traded, who is responsible to pay that deferred money? The team that originally signed them or the team that traded for him
Jeffrey Todd
9:48
It's all subject to negotiation.
9:50
I assume the starting point would be that you pay for whatever salary obligation is attributed to the portion of time the guy is on your roster, so if 2018 money was deferred to the future you'd still pay it, but ... teams have worked out plenty of wacky financial things before. Shouldn't be a particularly complicated issue. I certainly wouldn't presume that deferred money from already-played seasons would become the responsibility of an acquiring team.
A’s get no Love
9:50
For perennially having a Bottom 3 payroll, shouldn’t the A’s get more press for accomplishing more with less?  They are always in the playoff race it seems despite cheap ownership.
Jeffrey Todd
9:50
Someone should write a book
9:51
Maybe even a movie ... but let's not get ahead of ourselves, book first
9:52
Ha. I mean, I don't think that's really true. They get love if you are reading the right places and not getting distracted by a bunch of outdated thinking and mindlessly repeated drivel about how certain teams behave, etc. Not that I'm naming any names.
Up Toddy's Wahoo
9:53
Why are you so afraid to just throw out names and have an opinion? It's why we're here. No one thinks you're an expert, but you can be entertaining. So, entertain us!
Jeffrey Todd
9:54
I will throw out names when I have a reason to. But regarding the notion of being an expert ... who is, exactly? In the media sphere, I mean. Even if you are an expert in evaluating prospects, or valuing MLB players, or whatever niche you are in, that doesn't mean you have special insight into what actually matters for trade discussions: what player(s) do the various teams actually like on the other teams' rosters (mlb/milb)?
9:55
There are a lot of people with expertise in some area or another. Most of the people that really have it are going to be hesitant or will refuse to offer rank speculation when they don't have a good reason to support it.
Mr plow
9:55
There is no way Cashman is trading any of his top prospects for rental guys this isn’t the 1980’s when they traded Fred Mcgriff, willie McGee, Doug drabec and jay buhner for nothing
Jeffrey Todd
9:57
I also read today that the Dodgers never trade prospects for top rental players. Which was true for like the first two years of Friedman's regime ... before he got Darvish and Machado in consecutive seasons. Those teams are willing to trade valuable prospect assets for rentals. But they're also going to (try, at least to) avoid giving up the pieces they really believe in. And they will give proper value to the existing system assets in structuring deals, rather than being blinded by a desire to improve right now.
JLR
9:57
If the Braves were to trade for Grenkie, what would they have to give up? Would it depend on how much money they took on?
Jeffrey Todd
9:58
It always depends upon how much money is owed/will be taken on. That's true of every transaction. Sometimes you can take on more money and give up less in prospects; other times the opposite is true, based upon each teams' particular interests and the course of negotiations.
Rowdy Tellez
9:59
Should I be more upset with my demotion, or the fact that no one is referring to me as "Rowdy Roddy Tellez"?
Jeffrey Todd
10:00
Yin and yang, my son ... if you earn the appellation, it will be bestowed upon you.
O’s Boy
10:00
I read an article that the O’s will move from Baltimore in 2 years which is why they have torn apart the team so attendance will fall off thus justifies a move. Thoughts?
Jeffrey Todd
10:00
Having not seen that, it sounds outlandish.
Theo
10:00
Whit and Duffy to the Cubs for what?  Mike Montgomery, Miguel Amaya, and Ian Happ?
Jeffrey Todd
10:01
Royals aren't going to use Merrifield to dump the Duffy contract. They'd want premium talent for Whit.
Bemboozled
10:01
Thanks for the chats, hate your guts for that one.
Jeffrey Todd
10:01
You've all been bemboozled tonight!
10:02
Thanks everyone for chatting ... and for patience as we sort of re-jigger our chat timing and lineup. I believe Connor will be entering the fray soon, keep an eye out. I expect to be back on for another chat on Friday early afternoon.
Have a good one!
Connecting…