Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
Inbox
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 5  Next >

Giancarlo Stanton

Posted: 11/21/2012 10:42 PM

Giancarlo Stanton 


I got your attention didn't I!? Okay, so this is really the only place that I know of that has a decent base of posters as a forum for San Diego baseball, and I came across an interesting article today.
 
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/mlb--giancarlo-stanto n-should-be-on-trading-block--ndash--now--ndash--i f-marlins-were-serious-about-rebuilding----0657409 19.html

In this article Jeff Passan says that the Marlins should definitely trade Stanton. I agree with him, it makes perfect sense for the Marlins to move him and get a huge return back and I'm sure that after the blockbuster deal they just pulled with the Blue Jays they're willing to move him, no matter what they say publicly. Point is - I want to see him in a Padres uniform. Given, so does every other fan of every other team in baseball, but most teams don't have the talent pool the Padres do in the minors.

The article explains what would be needed to land Stanton. "... the sort of package necessary to acquire Stanton: three top-of-the-line, major league or major league-ready players with next to no service time, plus another two or three prospects." Assuming that this is true, who would you give up for Stanton, if you would at all? Personally, I would put up Rhymer Liriano, Casey Kelly, Robbie Erlin (3 top of the line prospects, 1 year away) Cory Spangenberg, Joe Wieland, and two of our B or below prospects.

I'd fight tooth and nail to keep Gyorko, but Forscythe could be on the table if they wanted him. Although, actually doing this I'm not sure if the Padres farm system is top heavy enough to make this trade work. They have the talent, but it's dispersed over so many players, that they might not have enough top of the line talent to beat out the Rangers or Mariners in a bidding war. They could just keep throwing prospects until we could get him, but I wouldn't want to see too many go, the package I proposed would already hit the farm system quite hard. 

Thoughts? 
Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/21/2012 11:31 PM

RE: Giancarlo Stanton 


3 players I hope are untouchable: Liriano Gyorko and Hedges. If we can find a way to keep erlin or Sampson as well awesome. I have no problem with any 4 of the following: Sampson Portillo Spangenberg Valdez J Decker Stites rincon or galvez. Would that even be enough?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/22/2012 12:29 AM

RE: Giancarlo Stanton 


I would love all three of them to be untouchable as well, but I don't think you pull a premier player like Stanton without giving them a player with at least A upside, and Liriano is the only guy in our system with legitimate A potential, AND he's at the same position. I don't think there's any way we could land Stanton without him being the centerpiece of the deal. And I originally included Hedges in the deal, but with the uncertainty of Grandal I don't think we can trade him, and Grandal certainly lost a ton of his value with his PED suspension. I think if we gave up ALL of those players we might have a chance, but I think Erlin and/or Sampson would have to be included. I'd prefer to give up Wieland over Erlin though. Who knows, the Blue Jays pulled highway robbery with just some decent prospects, maybe the Marlins would sell low on Stanton too. Doubt that package could keep pace with one of Profar or Andrus from the Rangers or ridiculous amounts of high upside arms from Seattle or Tampa Bay though.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 11/22/2012 5:03 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 


Dont forget we have Ascencio right behind Liriano.
He had 18 OF assists last year.
So if we trade Liriano,we still have a back up plan coming in case Stanton continues missing time due to injury.
If we could land Stanton and hold onto Gyorko then we could still trade Headley at next years deadline and recoup some prospects lost in acquiring Stanton.
So in theory,we would be basically trading Headley for Stanton and putting Gyorko at 3B.
Is Gyorko/Stanton better than Headley/Venorfia?
I say yes.



Prospect I'm Championing.........Jordan Paroubeck

Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/22/2012 6:38 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 


Stanton...whew love to get him.  Many might speculate the enormity of talent that would have to go to Miami but reality is that few if any teams have (and would be willing to deal) that level of talent for one player, even as good as Stanton.  The exception may be a team that is a big money team with major prospects knowing that they can buy FA talent to replace the prospects when they need help at the ML level.  NYY?

Stanton has four control years left (and arbitration will not be cheap) before he breaks the bank in FA at age 27. So for most teams he is a 4 year rental at the cost of the farm....got to think that team plans on winning very near term.

IF the Padres made a move for Stanton they do probably have the assets. Would the following tempt Miami:

1. Grandal: teams don't seem to care about suspensions or performance drops due to PEDs (Cabrera and Colon were quickly resigned)...C is a premium position....ML ready...he is low cost and has 5 or 6 years control...doesn't hurt that he is from Miami and of Cuban heritage...Padres could "bridge" with Hundley / Baker until Hedges is ready...establishes the new Padres organization as ethical (no drugs);
2. Kelly: SP is always at a premium....ML ready...he is low cost and has 6 years control...Padres have a wave of AAA/AA pitchers to cover his loss;
3. Portillo: SP with high potential still a year or two away;
4. Venable: always need to toss in an immediate position replacement...he still has 3 control years and if his numbers away from PETCO hold a very good player when his defense and base running are added in.

Hard to guage what appeals to Miami but doubt any other team could (would) come up with a better package.  Basically 3 ML ready blue chip prospects. Is four years of Stanton worth that?  Additionally, the Padres would hold on to Liriano (nice overlap with Stanton and Quentin coverage for the next few years), Gyorko (insurance for Headley moving on or 2B), and Hedges.

A line-up for the next two years of Cabrera...Forsythe...Headley...Quentin...Stanton.. .Gyorko...Alonso...Maybin...Hundley could be quite competitive.

Last edited 11/22/2012 6:42 AM by FENN68

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 11/22/2012 8:23 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 


I would make that trade.......and yes,four years of Stanton is worth that much.
Four years of an "affordable" Stanton is worth even more IMO.
Keep in mind,if Gyorko shows he can hit M.L. Pitching(which I think he will),we still have the option of trading Headley and recouping the pieces we gave up for Stanton anyway.
Or even better.....get more pitching or a SS.



Prospect I'm Championing.........Jordan Paroubeck

Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/22/2012 8:43 AM

RE: Giancarlo Stanton 


If both Gyorko and Headley hit like we think and hope they will we should keep them both. Then if we are able to get Stanton then we will have a ridiculous line up for years to come. Maybin/Gyorko/Headley/Quentin/Stanton/Alonso/Grand al/Forsythe or Cabrera/Pitcher. Ridiculous lineup...could switch Cabrera and Maybin too.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 11/22/2012 9:08 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 



MrPadre19 wrote: Dont forget we have Ascencio right behind Liriano.
He had 18 OF assists last year.
So if we trade Liriano,we still have a back up plan coming in case Stanton continues missing time due to injury.
If we could land Stanton and hold onto Gyorko then we could still trade Headley at next years deadline and recoup some prospects lost in acquiring Stanton.
So in theory,we would be basically trading Headley for Stanton and putting Gyorko at 3B.
Is Gyorko/Stanton better than Headley/Venorfia?
I say yes.
Ascencio does not have Liriano tools. Liriano is untochable after what he did in the AFL.

 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/22/2012 9:27 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 


they can have Venable to replace him in the lineup now......and I'm a big Liriano fan, but if it lands Stanton, you have to entertain that big time, and then lock him up for the next forever...
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 11/22/2012 10:31 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 


I think if the Padres could land a guy like Stanton without giving up the entire farm they should jump at the opportunity.  He has four years of control as is and would be a HUGE upgrade to this lineup.  It would also give the fans of San Diego some faith in the new ownership that they really mean business and want to bring a winner to San Diego.




Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 11/22/2012 12:56 PM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 



ramrodd23 wrote:
MrPadre19 wrote: Dont forget we have Ascencio right behind Liriano.
He had 18 OF assists last year.
So if we trade Liriano,we still have a back up plan coming in case Stanton continues missing time due to injury.
If we could land Stanton and hold onto Gyorko then we could still trade Headley at next years deadline and recoup some prospects lost in acquiring Stanton.
So in theory,we would be basically trading Headley for Stanton and putting Gyorko at 3B.
Is Gyorko/Stanton better than Headley/Venorfia?
I say yes.
Ascencio does not have Liriano tools. Liriano is untochable after what he did in the AFL.
Im not saying he's just as good,but he can hit and he has an incredible arm.
My only point was that if we had to trade Liriano to get Stanton we still had Ascencio coming up as insurance against injury.



Prospect I'm Championing.........Jordan Paroubeck

Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/22/2012 3:26 PM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 


I think the best case scenario is trading for Stanton and then locking him up long term. It would show the Padres fanbase that these new owners mean serious business, and I'd be okay with offering him a 10 year/200 million deal. I kid not. That kind of power doesn't just fade away, and another team will always be willing to take a flyer on a guy like Stanton if he stops producing. If I remember correctly Scott Boras is not his agent, so it's possible to sign him to an extension, rather than Boras who would force him to go to free agency. (I hate that guy)

Only thing is is I don't see the Padres landing him without Liriano in the deal, I just can't see it happening. That or they have to give up a very large chunk of their staple of arms in AAA/AA, messing with the rotation. Of course if we got Stanton he will be affordable for the next 4 years, during which we could use FA pitching as stopgaps to let our younger pitchers develop if we were forced to trade Erlin/Wieland/Kelly/Ross or someone else.

If we could swing it right a lineup of Maybin/Forscythe/Headley/Stanton/Gyorko/Grandal/Li riano/Alonso/Pitcher would be RIDICULOUS. One of the tops in the NL, easily. And besides putting Forscythe at short (an untested idea) the defense wouldn't be bad either, probably quite good with the exception of SS in fact. Talk about stacked with position players. Then the only issue is with SP since our bullpen seems to always figure itself out. All depends on who we give up, but if we kept that lineup intact there's no way most of our high upside arms are still around. So a meh rotation? That'd be unfortunate, but Petco can make a meh rotation top 10 if they stay healthy.

Last edited 11/22/2012 3:28 PM by ta1nted

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 11/22/2012 6:36 PM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 



ta1nted wrote: I think the best case scenario is trading for Stanton and then locking him up long term. It would show the Padres fanbase that these new owners mean serious business, and I'd be okay with offering him a 10 year/200 million deal. I kid not. That kind of power doesn't just fade away, and another team will always be willing to take a flyer on a guy like Stanton if he stops producing. If I remember correctly Scott Boras is not his agent, so it's possible to sign him to an extension, rather than Boras who would force him to go to free agency. (I hate that guy)

Only thing is is I don't see the Padres landing him without Liriano in the deal, I just can't see it happening. That or they have to give up a very large chunk of their staple of arms in AAA/AA, messing with the rotation. Of course if we got Stanton he will be affordable for the next 4 years, during which we could use FA pitching as stopgaps to let our younger pitchers develop if we were forced to trade Erlin/Wieland/Kelly/Ross or someone else.

If we could swing it right a lineup of Maybin/Forscythe/Headley/Stanton/Gyorko/Grandal/Li riano/Alonso/Pitcher would be RIDICULOUS. One of the tops in the NL, easily. And besides putting Forscythe at short (an untested idea) the defense wouldn't be bad either, probably quite good with the exception of SS in fact. Talk about stacked with position players. Then the only issue is with SP since our bullpen seems to always figure itself out. All depends on who we give up, but if we kept that lineup intact there's no way most of our high upside arms are still around. So a meh rotation? That'd be unfortunate, but Petco can make a meh rotation top 10 if they stay healthy.
There is no reason to lock up a guy with four controllable years left.



Prospect I'm Championing.........Jordan Paroubeck

Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/22/2012 7:33 PM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 


You're completely right, I should've specified that we extend him towards the end of his contract. 
MrPadre19 wrote:
 
There is no reason to lock up a guy with four controllable years left.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/23/2012 4:55 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 



MrPadre19 wrote:
ta1nted wrote: I think the best case scenario is trading for Stanton and then locking him up long term. It would show the Padres fanbase that these new owners mean serious business, and I'd be okay with offering him a 10 year/200 million deal. I kid not. That kind of power doesn't just fade away, and another team will always be willing to take a flyer on a guy like Stanton if he stops producing. If I remember correctly Scott Boras is not his agent, so it's possible to sign him to an extension, rather than Boras who would force him to go to free agency. (I hate that guy)

Only thing is is I don't see the Padres landing him without Liriano in the deal, I just can't see it happening. That or they have to give up a very large chunk of their staple of arms in AAA/AA, messing with the rotation. Of course if we got Stanton he will be affordable for the next 4 years, during which we could use FA pitching as stopgaps to let our younger pitchers develop if we were forced to trade Erlin/Wieland/Kelly/Ross or someone else.

If we could swing it right a lineup of Maybin/Forscythe/Headley/Stanton/Gyorko/Grandal/Li riano/Alonso/Pitcher would be RIDICULOUS. One of the tops in the NL, easily. And besides putting Forscythe at short (an untested idea) the defense wouldn't be bad either, probably quite good with the exception of SS in fact. Talk about stacked with position players. Then the only issue is with SP since our bullpen seems to always figure itself out. All depends on who we give up, but if we kept that lineup intact there's no way most of our high upside arms are still around. So a meh rotation? That'd be unfortunate, but Petco can make a meh rotation top 10 if they stay healthy.
There is no reason to lock up a guy with four controllable years left.
Signed Chase Headley? Right? 

IMO Stanton is a guy that you either lock up long term buying up the controllable years early, or you have nearly no chance of retaining him when he approaches FA, and by approaches I mean gets within sight of it...
Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/23/2012 7:12 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 


Let us not forget the the Padres are still a small / mid market team that at best will have a middle of the pack payroll ($80 - 90 MM)...some may want it different but that is the reality, so the team cannot afford to make a big payroll mistake.  As a result:

1.  The Padres will not offer guaranteed contracts for over 3 FA years...maybe 4 year deals IF the bulk of the guaranteed years are cheap arbitration years (e.g. Maybin);
2.  The Padres will not offer an annual salary to any player that exceeds about $15MM...teams don't win when one player eats up 20% of the payroll.

Bottom line one mistake on a long-term, big money deal can destroy a team like the Padres for a long time.......could be the player just fades (e.g. Wells, Soriano, etc.) or injury, either way, the downside is too great.  Plus if putting all that money into one player prevents a team from building a full roster...they lose...one player is not enough.

I would also expect that Stanton's side would not be all that interested in giving up FA years now.....think how Langoria got taken with his long term deal buy giving up FA years (and actually arbitration years) well below current market value.  Headley will make more via arbitration for his 5th and 6th control years than Langoria and for each of the FA years in Langoria's contract. If he is that good...he has got to test the FA market to get max pay.

Bottom line, no chance the Padres and Stanton could ever agree on an extension that covers FA years.  Same logic would suggest that the Padres and Headley will not agree on an extension covering FA years unless Headley repeats in 2012 performance...the Padres want to make a statement...Headley is willing to sign slightly under market ($15MM). If that happens, that will be the only big ticket player on the roster with the others being more than likely under $10MM for the best performers.

Having said all that....four years of Stanton at controllable year prices is still worth a lot and worth pursuing.  Just not likely to happen.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 11/23/2012 8:19 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 



FENN68 wrote: Let us not forget the the Padres are still a small / mid market team that at best will have a middle of the pack payroll ($80 - 90 MM)...some may want it different but that is the reality, so the team cannot afford to make a big payroll mistake.  As a result:

1.  The Padres will not offer guaranteed contracts for over 3 FA years...maybe 4 year deals IF the bulk of the guaranteed years are cheap arbitration years (e.g. Maybin);
2.  The Padres will not offer an annual salary to any player that exceeds about $15MM...teams don't win when one player eats up 20% of the payroll.

Bottom line one mistake on a long-term, big money deal can destroy a team like the Padres for a long time.......could be the player just fades (e.g. Wells, Soriano, etc.) or injury, either way, the downside is too great.  Plus if putting all that money into one player prevents a team from building a full roster...they lose...one player is not enough.

I would also expect that Stanton's side would not be all that interested in giving up FA years now.....think how Langoria got taken with his long term deal buy giving up FA years (and actually arbitration years) well below current market value.  Headley will make more via arbitration for his 5th and 6th control years than Langoria and for each of the FA years in Langoria's contract. If he is that good...he has got to test the FA market to get max pay.

Bottom line, no chance the Padres and Stanton could ever agree on an extension that covers FA years.  Same logic would suggest that the Padres and Headley will not agree on an extension covering FA years unless Headley repeats in 2012 performance...the Padres want to make a statement...Headley is willing to sign slightly under market ($15MM). If that happens, that will be the only big ticket player on the roster with the others being more than likely under $10MM for the best performers.

Having said all that....four years of Stanton at controllable year prices is still worth a lot and worth pursuing.  Just not likely to happen.
This^



Prospect I'm Championing.........Jordan Paroubeck

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 11/23/2012 8:21 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 



TPichierri wrote:
MrPadre19 wrote:
ta1nted wrote: I think the best case scenario is trading for Stanton and then locking him up long term. It would show the Padres fanbase that these new owners mean serious business, and I'd be okay with offering him a 10 year/200 million deal. I kid not. That kind of power doesn't just fade away, and another team will always be willing to take a flyer on a guy like Stanton if he stops producing. If I remember correctly Scott Boras is not his agent, so it's possible to sign him to an extension, rather than Boras who would force him to go to free agency. (I hate that guy)

Only thing is is I don't see the Padres landing him without Liriano in the deal, I just can't see it happening. That or they have to give up a very large chunk of their staple of arms in AAA/AA, messing with the rotation. Of course if we got Stanton he will be affordable for the next 4 years, during which we could use FA pitching as stopgaps to let our younger pitchers develop if we were forced to trade Erlin/Wieland/Kelly/Ross or someone else.

If we could swing it right a lineup of Maybin/Forscythe/Headley/Stanton/Gyorko/Grandal/Li riano/Alonso/Pitcher would be RIDICULOUS. One of the tops in the NL, easily. And besides putting Forscythe at short (an untested idea) the defense wouldn't be bad either, probably quite good with the exception of SS in fact. Talk about stacked with position players. Then the only issue is with SP since our bullpen seems to always figure itself out. All depends on who we give up, but if we kept that lineup intact there's no way most of our high upside arms are still around. So a meh rotation? That'd be unfortunate, but Petco can make a meh rotation top 10 if they stay healthy.
There is no reason to lock up a guy with four controllable years left.
Signed Chase Headley? Right? 

IMO Stanton is a guy that you either lock up long term buying up the controllable years early, or you have nearly no chance of retaining him when he approaches FA, and by approaches I mean gets within sight of it...
The Padres rolled the dice on Chase and came up Snake Eyes.
They "could" have locked him up last off season or maybe even prior to the A.S. break(if he was willing),but waiting....and his two break out months.....cost the Padres their chance.
Now,the chances are slim to nil.Chase is one player I wish was a SoCal boy!



Prospect I'm Championing.........Jordan Paroubeck

Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/23/2012 10:16 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 



MrPadre19 wrote:
TPichierri wrote:
MrPadre19 wrote:
ta1nted wrote: I think the best case scenario is trading for Stanton and then locking him up long term. It would show the Padres fanbase that these new owners mean serious business, and I'd be okay with offering him a 10 year/200 million deal. I kid not. That kind of power doesn't just fade away, and another team will always be willing to take a flyer on a guy like Stanton if he stops producing. If I remember correctly Scott Boras is not his agent, so it's possible to sign him to an extension, rather than Boras who would force him to go to free agency. (I hate that guy)

Only thing is is I don't see the Padres landing him without Liriano in the deal, I just can't see it happening. That or they have to give up a very large chunk of their staple of arms in AAA/AA, messing with the rotation. Of course if we got Stanton he will be affordable for the next 4 years, during which we could use FA pitching as stopgaps to let our younger pitchers develop if we were forced to trade Erlin/Wieland/Kelly/Ross or someone else.

If we could swing it right a lineup of Maybin/Forscythe/Headley/Stanton/Gyorko/Grandal/Li riano/Alonso/Pitcher would be RIDICULOUS. One of the tops in the NL, easily. And besides putting Forscythe at short (an untested idea) the defense wouldn't be bad either, probably quite good with the exception of SS in fact. Talk about stacked with position players. Then the only issue is with SP since our bullpen seems to always figure itself out. All depends on who we give up, but if we kept that lineup intact there's no way most of our high upside arms are still around. So a meh rotation? That'd be unfortunate, but Petco can make a meh rotation top 10 if they stay healthy.
There is no reason to lock up a guy with four controllable years left.
Signed Chase Headley? Right? 

IMO Stanton is a guy that you either lock up long term buying up the controllable years early, or you have nearly no chance of retaining him when he approaches FA, and by approaches I mean gets within sight of it...
The Padres rolled the dice on Chase and came up Snake Eyes.
They "could" have locked him up last off season or maybe even prior to the A.S. break(if he was willing),but waiting....and his two break out months.....cost the Padres their chance.
Now,the chances are slim to nil.Chase is one player I wish was a SoCal boy!
I'd rather roll the dice on a 23 year old established monster to anchor this team for the forseeable future, knowing how much potential is already in the system to add over the coming years, and considering the already exciting product on the field.... Stanton is a guy that someone is going to give a long *** contract too, and he's also one of those rare guys that the risk of such a contract is a pretty good risk........IMO.......
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 11/23/2012 11:42 AM

Re: Giancarlo Stanton 



MrPadre19 wrote:
ramrodd23 wrote:
MrPadre19 wrote: Dont forget we have Ascencio right behind Liriano.
He had 18 OF assists last year.
So if we trade Liriano,we still have a back up plan coming in case Stanton continues missing time due to injury.
If we could land Stanton and hold onto Gyorko then we could still trade Headley at next years deadline and recoup some prospects lost in acquiring Stanton.
So in theory,we would be basically trading Headley for Stanton and putting Gyorko at 3B.
Is Gyorko/Stanton better than Headley/Venorfia?
I say yes.
Ascencio does not have Liriano tools. Liriano is untochable after what he did in the AFL.
Im not saying he's just as good,but he can hit and he has an incredible arm.
My only point was that if we had to trade Liriano to get Stanton we still had Ascencio coming up as insurance against injury.

Liriano is are only good 5 tool player the Padres have. He is going no where. Gyorko is more likley traded than Liriano.

 

Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 5  Next >