Stanton's Value

[Warning Track Power]

The Giants have reportedly already said they'd take on the full contract, plus trade them Panik, Shaw & Beede. That's by far the best deal that's (rumored to be) out there.

I don't understand why the Dodgers aren't making this move. Stanton's rumored #1 choice is Los Angeles and the Dodgers have the $$ and the prospects to do the deal. A trade of Alex Verdugo, Yadier Alvarez, Brandon McCarthy ($11.5m salary expires after 2018), and Hyun-Jin Ryu ($7.8m salary expires after 2018) makes all the sense in the world for them.

 

Dodgers have an outstanding OF of Stanton-Taylor-Puig with Pederson as the fourth. Dodgers can afford to lose Verdugo because he doesn't have a place to play. Marlins get two top prospects and the salary relief while taking on two expiring contracts.

 

If I am a Dodger fan, I want them to make this move yesterday.

[KeithStone53151]

The Giants have reportedly already said they'd take on the full contract, plus trade them Panik, Shaw & Beede. That's by far the best deal that's (rumored to be) out there.

I don't understand why the Dodgers aren't making this move. Stanton's rumored #1 choice is Los Angeles and the Dodgers have the $$ and the prospects to do the deal. A trade of Alex Verdugo, Yadier Alvarez, Brandon McCarthy ($11.5m salary expires after 2018), and Hyun-Jin Ryu ($7.8m salary expires after 2018) makes all the sense in the world for them.

 

Dodgers have an outstanding OF of Stanton-Taylor-Puig with Pederson as the fourth. Dodgers can afford to lose Verdugo because he doesn't have a place to play. Marlins get two top prospects and the salary relief while taking on two expiring contracts.

 

If I am a Dodger fan, I want them to make this move yesterday.

 

The move to the Dodgers definitely makes sense, I'm not sure they need to give up quite that much to get it done though. Aside from that, a lineup of Taylor, Seager, Turner, Stanton, Bellinger, Forsythe, Puig, Grandal...my goodness

[Point Beer Is Best]

I'm not sure that the Dodgers want to assume that much payroll. They can, but I think they are trying to stay under the luxury tax threshold.

[reillymcshane]

https://www.fanragsports.com/heyman-yankees-must-get-creative-if-they-want-stanton/

 

Who's ready for some east coast bias. So now according to Heyman, the Yankees could target Stanton...but would require the Marlins to take back a bunch of bad contracts? Why? That makes literally zero sense for the Marlins unless the prospect return is absolutely enormous. I'd bet at least a handful of teams would take the contract and give up a couple mid-level prospects at minimum. In his dreamworld, this deal could happen apparently. Yeah, ok Jon. Usually trades have to make sense to both sides to actually happen...

I guess I don't see the 'east coast bias' thing here. Yes, he probably is hoping the Yankee-related news helps with his clicks. But I don't see it as 'bias' or anything. In reality, the Yankees are probably the biggest force in baseball. He says that they have spoken to the Marlins about Stanton. I mean, should he NOT report what he has heard? To speculate how a deal would work isn't outrageous.

 

Ultimately, Heyman is just saying that if the Yankees are serious about Stanton, they need to move some salaries in the deal - which means they include better prospects in the return as well. He mentions 'some combination of Jacoby Ellsbury, Chase Headley and maybe Brett Gardner' would need to be involved. And he stresses that Ellsbury (who's owed around $90M over the next four years) is hard to move because of his no-trade deal. That leaves Gardner (who is not a 'bad' contract) and Headley - who are due $24.5M next year - plus a $2M buyout for Gardner. Taking back $25M in salaries in 2018 might be too much for Florida, but there are ways to mitigate that. It's not hard to see Florida being able to flip Gardner (and unload his salary) for something decent. Headley would be tougher. But even if you're left covering only $5-8M or whatever of those two salaries - it might work for Florida.

 

I acknowledge that people will write stuff that gets themselves coverage - and that the coast markets, which are bigger, tend to get more written about their teams - but to just say everything is 'east coast bias' just seems to be stretching it. Heyman covered the Yankees as a beat writer for a long time. He has interest, sources and a following from that market. If he really got wind that the Yankees are asking about Stanton - he's foolish not to report it.

[bill hAll Star]

https://www.fanragsports.com/heyman-yankees-must-get-creative-if-they-want-stanton/

 

Who's ready for some east coast bias. So now according to Heyman, the Yankees could target Stanton...but would require the Marlins to take back a bunch of bad contracts? Why? That makes literally zero sense for the Marlins unless the prospect return is absolutely enormous. I'd bet at least a handful of teams would take the contract and give up a couple mid-level prospects at minimum. In his dreamworld, this deal could happen apparently. Yeah, ok Jon. Usually trades have to make sense to both sides to actually happen...

I guess I don't see the 'east coast bias' thing here. Yes, he probably is hoping the Yankee-related news helps with his clicks. But I don't see it as 'bias' or anything. In reality, the Yankees are probably the biggest force in baseball. He says that they have spoken to the Marlins about Stanton. I mean, should he NOT report what he has heard? To speculate how a deal would work isn't outrageous.

 

Ultimately, Heyman is just saying that if the Yankees are serious about Stanton, they need to move some salaries in the deal - which means they include better prospects in the return as well. He mentions 'some combination of Jacoby Ellsbury, Chase Headley and maybe Brett Gardner' would need to be involved. And he stresses that Ellsbury (who's owed around $90M over the next four years) is hard to move because of his no-trade deal. That leaves Gardner (who is not a 'bad' contract) and Headley - who are due $24.5M next year - plus a $2M buyout for Gardner. Taking back $25M in salaries in 2018 might be too much for Florida, but there are ways to mitigate that. It's not hard to see Florida being able to flip Gardner (and unload his salary) for something decent. Headley would be tougher. But even if you're left covering only $5-8M or whatever of those two salaries - it might work for Florida.

 

I acknowledge that people will write stuff that gets themselves coverage - and that the coast markets, which are bigger, tend to get more written about their teams - but to just say everything is 'east coast bias' just seems to be stretching it. Heyman covered the Yankees as a beat writer for a long time. He has interest, sources and a following from that market. If he really got wind that the Yankees are asking about Stanton - he's foolish not to report it.

 

Amen. And I think if the Yankees were offering the most "we'll pay x of the deal" that they'd maybe take on $25-30 million for a year or 2 to clear themselves of the $300 remaining million and get a few prospects.

 

Once again, the Yankees are one of the suitors (just like for Otani) and the article is basically stating a way it could happen.

[KeithStone53151]

https://www.fanragsports.com/heyman-yankees-must-get-creative-if-they-want-stanton/

 

Who's ready for some east coast bias. So now according to Heyman, the Yankees could target Stanton...but would require the Marlins to take back a bunch of bad contracts? Why? That makes literally zero sense for the Marlins unless the prospect return is absolutely enormous. I'd bet at least a handful of teams would take the contract and give up a couple mid-level prospects at minimum. In his dreamworld, this deal could happen apparently. Yeah, ok Jon. Usually trades have to make sense to both sides to actually happen...

I guess I don't see the 'east coast bias' thing here. Yes, he probably is hoping the Yankee-related news helps with his clicks. But I don't see it as 'bias' or anything. In reality, the Yankees are probably the biggest force in baseball. He says that they have spoken to the Marlins about Stanton. I mean, should he NOT report what he has heard? To speculate how a deal would work isn't outrageous.

 

Ultimately, Heyman is just saying that if the Yankees are serious about Stanton, they need to move some salaries in the deal - which means they include better prospects in the return as well. He mentions 'some combination of Jacoby Ellsbury, Chase Headley and maybe Brett Gardner' would need to be involved. And he stresses that Ellsbury (who's owed around $90M over the next four years) is hard to move because of his no-trade deal. That leaves Gardner (who is not a 'bad' contract) and Headley - who are due $24.5M next year - plus a $2M buyout for Gardner. Taking back $25M in salaries in 2018 might be too much for Florida, but there are ways to mitigate that. It's not hard to see Florida being able to flip Gardner (and unload his salary) for something decent. Headley would be tougher. But even if you're left covering only $5-8M or whatever of those two salaries - it might work for Florida.

 

I acknowledge that people will write stuff that gets themselves coverage - and that the coast markets, which are bigger, tend to get more written about their teams - but to just say everything is 'east coast bias' just seems to be stretching it. Heyman covered the Yankees as a beat writer for a long time. He has interest, sources and a following from that market. If he really got wind that the Yankees are asking about Stanton - he's foolish not to report it.

 

Reporting it is fine, I'm sure the Yankees have checked in. Outlining how a deal could work absolutely makes sense as well. But that to me isn't really what he's doing. He's outlining how a deal could work from the Yankees perspective only, in a manner that makes absolutely no sense for the Marlins. I'd bet every dime I have that the Yankees aren't unloading multiple of those bad contracts on the Marlins in a Stanton deal unless the Marlins get an absolute kings ransom in prospects. I'm talking 3 of their top 5 plus sweeteners MINIMUM. And even still, I'm not so sure the Marlins want to deal with a team trying to dump bad contracts on them when there are at least a few other teams reportedly offering good prospects for Stanton without trying to dump bad contracts on them. If he doesn't want to appear biased, he should approach an article like this from both viewpoints rather than the one favoring the big market.

 

I can admittedly get a bit over-reactionary when it comes to big market bias. It's probably not as bad as I make it out to be, but it bugs me and I try to shine a light on it when I see it. I don't see haudricourt making ridiculous trade proposals in his articles, and he's actually a Brewers beat writer and not at a national level quite like Heyman.

[mlloyd10]

Giancarlo Stanton trade development: Source says #Marlins likely would accept offer of Panik, Beede and Shaw for Stanton alone -- if #SFGiants committed to paying at least $250 million of the $295 million left on Stanton’s contract. @MLB @MLBNetwork

[bill hAll Star]

https://www.fanragsports.com/heyman-yankees-must-get-creative-if-they-want-stanton/

 

Who's ready for some east coast bias. So now according to Heyman, the Yankees could target Stanton...but would require the Marlins to take back a bunch of bad contracts? Why? That makes literally zero sense for the Marlins unless the prospect return is absolutely enormous. I'd bet at least a handful of teams would take the contract and give up a couple mid-level prospects at minimum. In his dreamworld, this deal could happen apparently. Yeah, ok Jon. Usually trades have to make sense to both sides to actually happen...

I guess I don't see the 'east coast bias' thing here. Yes, he probably is hoping the Yankee-related news helps with his clicks. But I don't see it as 'bias' or anything. In reality, the Yankees are probably the biggest force in baseball. He says that they have spoken to the Marlins about Stanton. I mean, should he NOT report what he has heard? To speculate how a deal would work isn't outrageous.

 

Ultimately, Heyman is just saying that if the Yankees are serious about Stanton, they need to move some salaries in the deal - which means they include better prospects in the return as well. He mentions 'some combination of Jacoby Ellsbury, Chase Headley and maybe Brett Gardner' would need to be involved. And he stresses that Ellsbury (who's owed around $90M over the next four years) is hard to move because of his no-trade deal. That leaves Gardner (who is not a 'bad' contract) and Headley - who are due $24.5M next year - plus a $2M buyout for Gardner. Taking back $25M in salaries in 2018 might be too much for Florida, but there are ways to mitigate that. It's not hard to see Florida being able to flip Gardner (and unload his salary) for something decent. Headley would be tougher. But even if you're left covering only $5-8M or whatever of those two salaries - it might work for Florida.

 

I acknowledge that people will write stuff that gets themselves coverage - and that the coast markets, which are bigger, tend to get more written about their teams - but to just say everything is 'east coast bias' just seems to be stretching it. Heyman covered the Yankees as a beat writer for a long time. He has interest, sources and a following from that market. If he really got wind that the Yankees are asking about Stanton - he's foolish not to report it.

 

Reporting it is fine, I'm sure the Yankees have checked in. Outlining how a deal could work absolutely makes sense as well. But that to me isn't really what he's doing. He's outlining how a deal could work from the Yankees perspective only, in a manner that makes absolutely no sense for the Marlins. I'd bet every dime I have that the Yankees aren't unloading multiple of those bad contracts on the Marlins in a Stanton deal unless the Marlins get an absolute kings ransom in prospects. I'm talking 3 of their top 5 plus sweeteners MINIMUM. And even still, I'm not so sure the Marlins want to deal with a team trying to dump bad contracts on them when there are at least a few other teams reportedly offering good prospects for Stanton without trying to dump bad contracts on them. If he doesn't want to appear biased, he should approach an article like this from both viewpoints rather than the one favoring the big market.

 

I can admittedly get a bit over-reactionary when it comes to big market bias. It's probably not as bad as I make it out to be, but it bugs me and I try to shine a light on it when I see it. I don't see haudricourt making ridiculous trade proposals in his articles, and he's actually a Brewers beat writer and not at a national level quite like Heyman.

 

I'm not so sure about that. The recent report is that the Giants have gotten the asking price down to paying $250 of the $295 (and giving up a few prospects) and there still isn't agreement. None of the headlining prospects are anything special in the rumored Giants deal.

 

So what's the difference between that and the Yankees taking on all $295 (maybe they could talk that down) and including $20-30 million in salaries that can expire after this year or next? The Marlins can probably flip those players during the season.

 

He mentioned that Ellsbury isn't likely but they could probably throw Gardner and Headley in there.

 

The Yankees could make that deal and still have a little breathing room under the luxury tax threshold.

 

The only reason the Marlins would hate that offset is if they are so dead set on balancing their books this year that they can't take a 1 year for 10 year tradeoff.

[KeithStone53151]

 

I'm not so sure about that. The recent report is that the Giants have gotten the asking price down to paying $250 of the $295 (and giving up a few prospects) and there still isn't agreement. None of the headlining prospects are anything special in the rumored Giants deal.

 

So what's the difference between that and the Yankees taking on all $295 (maybe they could talk that down) and including $20-30 million in salaries that can expire after this year or next? The Marlins can probably flip those players during the season.

 

He mentioned that Ellsbury isn't likely but they could probably throw Gardner and Headley in there.

 

The Yankees could make that deal and still have a little breathing room under the luxury tax threshold.

 

The only reason the Marlins would hate that offset is if they are so dead set on balancing their books this year that they can't take a 1 year for 10 year tradeoff.

 

Getting Panik allows the Marlins to trade Gordon and further offset salary and acquire talent, or to flip Panik for more minor league talent. I imagine the former is more likely. Beede and Shaw are very good prospects, though all of the yankees top 5 are better to varying degrees. Maybe it would be more like 2 of their top 5, not 3...at least to top the Giants offer. But there's also no guarantee that the Giants offer is the best one on the table...or that other teams don't see that offer and try to counter. I can't imagine the Dodgers letting Stanton go to the Giants without putting up a fight.

[bill hAll Star]

 

I'm not so sure about that. The recent report is that the Giants have gotten the asking price down to paying $250 of the $295 (and giving up a few prospects) and there still isn't agreement. None of the headlining prospects are anything special in the rumored Giants deal.

 

So what's the difference between that and the Yankees taking on all $295 (maybe they could talk that down) and including $20-30 million in salaries that can expire after this year or next? The Marlins can probably flip those players during the season.

 

He mentioned that Ellsbury isn't likely but they could probably throw Gardner and Headley in there.

 

The Yankees could make that deal and still have a little breathing room under the luxury tax threshold.

 

The only reason the Marlins would hate that offset is if they are so dead set on balancing their books this year that they can't take a 1 year for 10 year tradeoff.

 

Getting Panik allows the Marlins to trade Gordon and further offset salary and acquire talent, or to flip Panik for more minor league talent. I imagine the former is more likely. Beede and Shaw are very good prospects, though all of the yankees top 5 are better to varying degrees. Maybe it would be more like 2 of their top 5, not 3...at least to top the Giants offer. But there's also no guarantee that the Giants offer is the best one on the table...or that other teams don't see that offer and try to counter. I can't imagine the Dodgers letting Stanton go to the Giants without putting up a fight.

 

Panik doesn't matter that much since this is somewhat of a lost year for the Marlins and Panik is kinda just a guy.

 

Shaw and Beede are decent prospects. Not elite by any means. The Yankees' top 5 probably has more higher ceiling guys.

 

Regardless, the point stands that Heyman's suggestion is realistic for the Yankees.

[wallus]

If I were the Marlins, I would take that deal and be happy about it.

[brewcrewdue80]

Stanton in the NL West = 40-45 homers.

Stanton in the AL East = 55+ homers.

 

He should go to Boston or NYY and put up video game numbers and build his brand. He could then come back and buy the Marlins from Jeter if he wanted.

 

I don't know if park factors are that affecting Stanton. Mind you he had his numbers in Marlins stadium and the NL East.

 

He'd get games at Colorado and Arizona to offset some of the Dodgers/Giants park factors. FWIW his splits for his entire career are over 1.0 OPS against all of the West teams. For the stadiums themselves only Arizona's Chase field is his OPS below 1.0 at a modest .934.

 

I think the split difference is 45-52 vs 55-75. If Boston would trade for him( they won't) but the HR amounts would be insane.

 

A side Note: Stanton has one of his worst OPS at Miller Park a paltry .614 in 23 games. Which is the lowest outside of no longer Turner Field when played over 5games.

 

also fun fact: Stanton hit double the HRs in 10 games at Atlanta's new park-4 than he had in 42 games at Turner-2

[JosephC]

Interesting offer from the Giants. Really all depends on how one values Panik. Average WAR between Baseball Reference and Fangraphs over the last three years is 2.3. If that's what Panik is moving forward, this is a pretty good offer from the Giants. But Panik's best year by far was 2015, if the average WAR is limited to just 2016 & 2017 the average drops all the way down to 1.6. Even if one takes the 1.6 WAR value for Panik and projects that over the next three year, the Giants would still be giving up 53.12 million in surplus value which isn't a terrible offer (Panik = 30.22 million, Shaw and Beede at 11.45 million each).

[KeithStone53151]

 

I'm not so sure about that. The recent report is that the Giants have gotten the asking price down to paying $250 of the $295 (and giving up a few prospects) and there still isn't agreement. None of the headlining prospects are anything special in the rumored Giants deal.

 

So what's the difference between that and the Yankees taking on all $295 (maybe they could talk that down) and including $20-30 million in salaries that can expire after this year or next? The Marlins can probably flip those players during the season.

 

He mentioned that Ellsbury isn't likely but they could probably throw Gardner and Headley in there.

 

The Yankees could make that deal and still have a little breathing room under the luxury tax threshold.

 

The only reason the Marlins would hate that offset is if they are so dead set on balancing their books this year that they can't take a 1 year for 10 year tradeoff.

 

Getting Panik allows the Marlins to trade Gordon and further offset salary and acquire talent, or to flip Panik for more minor league talent. I imagine the former is more likely. Beede and Shaw are very good prospects, though all of the yankees top 5 are better to varying degrees. Maybe it would be more like 2 of their top 5, not 3...at least to top the Giants offer. But there's also no guarantee that the Giants offer is the best one on the table...or that other teams don't see that offer and try to counter. I can't imagine the Dodgers letting Stanton go to the Giants without putting up a fight.

 

Panik doesn't matter that much since this is somewhat of a lost year for the Marlins and Panik is kinda just a guy.

 

Shaw and Beede are decent prospects. Not elite by any means. The Yankees' top 5 probably has more higher ceiling guys.

 

Regardless, the point stands that Heyman's suggestion is realistic for the Yankees.

 

Panik's greatest value comes from a decent coverage option allowing the Marlins to easily trade Gordon and his contract for value. Filling 2b with Yadiel Rivera would get tremendous backlash, but Panik has some name value and is a pretty solid 2nd division starter.

[bill hAll Star]

It wouldn't hurt to put Panik in there, but if they're truly trading arguably the two most recognizable faces in the franchise in a franchise that doesn't have a large base...I think they'd be OK starting a journeyman AAAA guy at 2B. If that's the breaking point between getting $250-300 million off their hands + Gordon's deal eventually (which isn't that bad), they'd live with a bit of that backlash.

 

They were starting guys like JT Riddle and Miguel Rojas for large portions of last year. The fans will live with a journeyman 2B for a while while Jeter rebuilds.

[jerichoholicninja]

Trading Stanton and Gordon means they have no intention of competing. In that case, it makes no difference if Yadiel Rivera or Panik plays 2B. Rivera would probably be the better option since since he's the worse player.

[reillymcshane]

Hearing the the Stanton to Giants deal is agreed upon by the clubs - just now they have to see if Stanton will agree to the deal. The deal is a previously discussed - Panik, Beede and Shaw for Stanton + cash.

[OnaBadger58]

Hearing the the Stanton to Giants deal is agreed upon by the clubs - just now they have to see if Stanton will agree to the deal. The deal is a previously discussed - Panik, Beede and Shaw for Stanton + cash.

That's crazy. Trading a league MVP for two fringe-to-outside top 100 prospects and a pretty decent 2b. Would have thought Heliot Ramos would have to thrown in there as the young prospect with really high upside.

[KeithStone53151]

Hearing the the Stanton to Giants deal is agreed upon by the clubs - just now they have to see if Stanton will agree to the deal. The deal is a previously discussed - Panik, Beede and Shaw for Stanton + cash.

That's crazy. Trading a league MVP for two fringe-to-outside top 100 prospects and a pretty decent 2b. Would have thought Heliot Ramos would have to thrown in there as the young prospect with really high upside.

 

The Giants are also trading for the right to pay Stanton $290 million. It's not quite as simple as you made it sound...

[wallus]

This is what happens when you sell the Marlins for 1.2 billion to guys that can not afford them. Good job MLB.

[OnaBadger58]

The Giants are also trading for the right to pay Stanton $290 million. It's not quite as simple as you made it sound...

I'm well aware of that. I still would have thought the return would be comparable, if not better that what Detroit got for trading away a, at the time, 34 yr old pitcher who was owed around $85 million in Verlander.

[bill hAll Star]

The Giants are also trading for the right to pay Stanton $290 million. It's not quite as simple as you made it sound...

I'm well aware of that. I still would have thought the return would be comparable, if not better that what Detroit got for trading away a, at the time, 34 yr old pitcher who was owed around $85 million in Verlander.

 

3 years for a pretty good pitcher is a risk, but won't cripple your franchise. They also didn't take on all $85 million, which is why they gave up some prospects.

 

Verlander's likely was only $56 million (and I think they got $16 back from Detroit making it $40). I think the final year only vests if Verlander is a top 5 Cy Young candidate, which is possible, but he'll be quite a bit older then and he seems to really sandbag half of the regular season these days.

 

If Stanton's play declines over the next 3 years, they'll still have 8 years left to pay him. Much, much bigger risk.

[Point Beer Is Best]

The Giants are also trading for the right to pay Stanton $290 million. It's not quite as simple as you made it sound...

I'm well aware of that. I still would have thought the return would be comparable, if not better that what Detroit got for trading away a, at the time, 34 yr old pitcher who was owed around $85 million in Verlander.

 

3 years for a pretty good pitcher is a risk, but won't cripple your franchise. They also didn't take on all $85 million, which is why they gave up some prospects.

 

Verlander's likely was only $56 million (and I think they got $16 back from Detroit making it $40). I think the final year only vests if Verlander is a top 5 Cy Young candidate, which is possible, but he'll be quite a bit older then and he seems to really sandbag half of the regular season these days.

 

If Stanton's play declines over the next 3 years, they'll still have 8 years left to pay him. Much, much bigger risk.

 

Exactly. Miami essentially killed Stanton's trade value (and arguably diminished the franchise value at the time of sale) by giving him that long of an extension coupled with a full no-trade clause.

[jerichoholicninja]

So it looking like Stanton to SF is a very good possibility and them also being a finalist for Othani, could they be looking to dump some SP from their payroll if they sign him? I was interested in Samardzija till I saw how long he was signed for. I would have no problem paying him $20M a year but not for 3 more years. The other guy would be Moore. He's been flat out awful since going to SF but he's only got one more year guaranteed at $9M and then a $10M option for another and was sort of serviceable with Tampa. I wouldn't give up anything of any value for either of those guys, just take on their whole contracts, heck maybe even take one of their prospects a la Aaron Hill.

[bill hAll Star]

So it looking like Stanton to SF is a very good possibility and them also being a finalist for Othani, could they be looking to dump some SP from their payroll if they sign him? I was interested in Samardzija till I saw how long he was signed for. I would have no problem paying him $20M a year but not for 3 more years. The other guy would be Moore. He's been flat out awful since going to SF but he's only got one more year guaranteed at $9M and then a $10M option for another and was sort of serviceable with Tampa. I wouldn't give up anything of any value for either of those guys, just take on their whole contracts, heck maybe even take one of their prospects a la Aaron Hill.

 

Moore has been a bad pitcher since he stopped throwing his slider, so unless he starts throwing that again, I’m out. I could see them trying to get out of half of that or something if a team would bite.

 

I wonder if the Marlins would be taking on Moore and/or Pence in the deal.

 

It’s interesting because they’re clearly all in yet again and are 3-time luxury tax offenders so they’d owe big time...but they’re kinda all-in, so would they really want to give away a solid pitcher in Samardzija? That’ll be interesting. I’d have been all over absorbing his contract if so.