Manny Machado (Part 1)

[shanedog19]

I'm warming to the idea of Machado. Just imagine what he'll do for attendance the rest of the season, the club has to be looking at this as well. Would Ortiz, Woodruff, and Broxton get this done? I just don't want to include Huira or Burnes for a 3 month rental.

[bill hAll Star]

I'm still not convinced that the better SS rental play may not be Jed Lowrie? He should cost 1/2 of whatever it would take to get Machado, and Lowrie is a switch hitter that can also play some 2B. I have no idea how he compares to Machado defensively at SS, and it doesn't look like Lowrie has even played a game at SS yet this year.

 

Then, with the prospects you save getting Lowrie, you could then go out and go big on either a controllable TOR starter like deGrom or Sydergaard (and yes, I know the Mets said they aren't trading them, but you could always make them an offer that they can't refuse) or you could go hard after Realmuto.

 

I know Lowrie doesn't make the type of "splash" impact that a deal for Machado would make, but I'm just having a hard time seeing MM as the type of guy Stearns would be attracted to. Not to say that he isn't OK going after a rental, but I can't see him wanting to give up a bunch of the top prospects for a guy they'd only have for 3 months.

 

Thoughts?

 

I'm not sure that Oakland is selling. They may be a long ways out of the playoff race, but it's still hard to sell at 10 games over .500.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

My guess for an offer is Machado for Broxton and Woodruff. Might take another player, such as Wilkerson.

 

All three could step into their line up right now, and while none is going to be a superstar, they are the kinds of guys they should take chances on and ride out the good and bad times.

 

Just a guess.

 

I would love that deal but if that’s all it would take why hasn’t it happened already? It’s basically just Woodruff for the best offensive infielder in the game. Seems like a no brainer.

 

I wouldn't blame the Brewers for being hesitant to give up Woodruff. Young starting power pitchers are rare enough, not to mention the fact that he has looked very good at Colorado Springs this year, whereas Burnes (who many say is off limits) has struggled at Colorado Springs. Woodruff isn't some "throw-in" type pitcher. The guy is following a very similar path that Jimmy Nelson did, and could very well turn out to be a solid mid-rotation starter, if not much more.

[tmwiese55]

I'm still not convinced that the better SS rental play may not be Jed Lowrie? He should cost 1/2 of whatever it would take to get Machado, and Lowrie is a switch hitter that can also play some 2B. I have no idea how he compares to Machado defensively at SS, and it doesn't look like Lowrie has even played a game at SS yet this year.

 

Then, with the prospects you save getting Lowrie, you could then go out and go big on either a controllable TOR starter like deGrom or Sydergaard (and yes, I know the Mets said they aren't trading them, but you could always make them an offer that they can't refuse) or you could go hard after Realmuto.

 

I know Lowrie doesn't make the type of "splash" impact that a deal for Machado would make, but I'm just having a hard time seeing MM as the type of guy Stearns would be attracted to. Not to say that he isn't OK going after a rental, but I can't see him wanting to give up a bunch of the top prospects for a guy they'd only have for 3 months.

 

Thoughts?

 

I've thought similarly. Like we could be involved in this to push the price and just in case we can get MM for cheaper than thought, but then call Oak and go for that instead. I'd say the problem with this plan is that Oak is like 10 games above .500. I know still a long shot for the playoffs, but still tough to just punt on a season when you're 10 above. It's also not unfeasible to sign Lowry on some kind of reasonable 2 year type deal to fill a gap here next year.

 

Also, agree on the comments about Machado's D. Of course it's being balanced by elite level hitting rather than just ok hitting though. Still, I was kicking around the idea of somehow playing him at 3B and Shaw at 2B? Then have a good D at SS in Saladino/Arcia. I'm sure Shaw would grade out poor at 2B but you'd have good D at the other two spots. I mean, guys like Utley are still playing everyday at 2B, Shaw should be able to do that at least.

 

ETA: I think Lowrie has really cooled after his ridiculous start too? Could be wrong but I thought I recall that from a week or two back

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I'm still not convinced that the better SS rental play may not be Jed Lowrie? He should cost 1/2 of whatever it would take to get Machado, and Lowrie is a switch hitter that can also play some 2B. I have no idea how he compares to Machado defensively at SS, and it doesn't look like Lowrie has even played a game at SS yet this year.

 

Then, with the prospects you save getting Lowrie, you could then go out and go big on either a controllable TOR starter like deGrom or Sydergaard (and yes, I know the Mets said they aren't trading them, but you could always make them an offer that they can't refuse) or you could go hard after Realmuto.

 

I know Lowrie doesn't make the type of "splash" impact that a deal for Machado would make, but I'm just having a hard time seeing MM as the type of guy Stearns would be attracted to. Not to say that he isn't OK going after a rental, but I can't see him wanting to give up a bunch of the top prospects for a guy they'd only have for 3 months.

 

Thoughts?

 

The guy is putting up numbers he has never even come close to approaching before, in his walk year, at 34 years old. He's fine I guess, but Jed Lowrie is never going to be a player an opposing team pitches around. I don't think he is enough of an upgrade from Miller or Saladino to bother.

[Boomer5]

My guess for an offer is Machado for Broxton and Woodruff. Might take another player, such as Wilkerson.

 

All three could step into their line up right now, and while none is going to be a superstar, they are the kinds of guys they should take chances on and ride out the good and bad times.

 

Just a guess.

 

I would love that deal but if that’s all it would take why hasn’t it happened already? It’s basically just Woodruff for the best offensive infielder in the game. Seems like a no brainer.

 

I wouldn't blame the Brewers for being hesitant to give up Woodruff. Young starting power pitchers are rare enough, not to mention the fact that he has looked very good at Colorado Springs this year, whereas Burnes (who many say is off limits) has struggled at Colorado Springs. Woodruff isn't some "throw-in" type pitcher. The guy is following a very similar path that Jimmy Nelson did, and could very well turn out to be a solid mid-rotation starter, if not much more.

 

Oh no doubt. Woodruff is a real prospect and I guy I wouldn’t just give up on based on a small sample of MLB results.

 

Still this is Machado we are talking about so we will have to give up quality. Woodruff by all measures seems to be our 4th best prospect if you include Peralta still in that category.

[Boomer5]

I'm still not convinced that the better SS rental play may not be Jed Lowrie? He should cost 1/2 of whatever it would take to get Machado, and Lowrie is a switch hitter that can also play some 2B. I have no idea how he compares to Machado defensively at SS, and it doesn't look like Lowrie has even played a game at SS yet this year.

 

Then, with the prospects you save getting Lowrie, you could then go out and go big on either a controllable TOR starter like deGrom or Sydergaard (and yes, I know the Mets said they aren't trading them, but you could always make them an offer that they can't refuse) or you could go hard after Realmuto.

 

I know Lowrie doesn't make the type of "splash" impact that a deal for Machado would make, but I'm just having a hard time seeing MM as the type of guy Stearns would be attracted to. Not to say that he isn't OK going after a rental, but I can't see him wanting to give up a bunch of the top prospects for a guy they'd only have for 3 months.

 

Thoughts?

 

I’d be fine with this. Jack up the price to LA or Chicago for Machado then get Lowrie for Ray or some low level package like that.

[bill hAll Star]

I'm still not convinced that the better SS rental play may not be Jed Lowrie? He should cost 1/2 of whatever it would take to get Machado, and Lowrie is a switch hitter that can also play some 2B. I have no idea how he compares to Machado defensively at SS, and it doesn't look like Lowrie has even played a game at SS yet this year.

 

Then, with the prospects you save getting Lowrie, you could then go out and go big on either a controllable TOR starter like deGrom or Sydergaard (and yes, I know the Mets said they aren't trading them, but you could always make them an offer that they can't refuse) or you could go hard after Realmuto.

 

I know Lowrie doesn't make the type of "splash" impact that a deal for Machado would make, but I'm just having a hard time seeing MM as the type of guy Stearns would be attracted to. Not to say that he isn't OK going after a rental, but I can't see him wanting to give up a bunch of the top prospects for a guy they'd only have for 3 months.

 

Thoughts?

 

I’d be fine with this. Jack up the price to LA or Chicago for Machado then get Lowrie for Ray or some low level package like that.

 

I'm not very high on Ray but I'm not even sure I'd give up Ray for Lowrie. He could very easily have a worse finish to the season than the Miller/Saladino grouping at the plate and Lowrie does not really play SS anymore. Miller/Villar at 2B other than taking up 2 roster spots is a great platoon.

[splitterpfj]

If the Brewers give away Corey Ray for two months of Jed Lowrie, I will actively root against them for the entirety of Lowrie's tenure in Milwaukee.

[Madhawk23]

I'm still not convinced that the better SS rental play may not be Jed Lowrie? He should cost 1/2 of whatever it would take to get Machado, and Lowrie is a switch hitter that can also play some 2B. I have no idea how he compares to Machado defensively at SS, and it doesn't look like Lowrie has even played a game at SS yet this year.

 

Then, with the prospects you save getting Lowrie, you could then go out and go big on either a controllable TOR starter like deGrom or Sydergaard (and yes, I know the Mets said they aren't trading them, but you could always make them an offer that they can't refuse) or you could go hard after Realmuto.

 

I know Lowrie doesn't make the type of "splash" impact that a deal for Machado would make, but I'm just having a hard time seeing MM as the type of guy Stearns would be attracted to. Not to say that he isn't OK going after a rental, but I can't see him wanting to give up a bunch of the top prospects for a guy they'd only have for 3 months.

 

Thoughts?

 

The guy is putting up numbers he has never even come close to approaching before, in his walk year, at 34 years old. He's fine I guess, but Jed Lowrie is never going to be a player an opposing team pitches around. I don't think he is enough of an upgrade from Miller or Saladino to bother.

 

Fair enough. Machado is clearly an impact bat that you'd put right in the #3 spot in your lineup each night without hesitation, and I realize that Lowrie is more of solid (but not elite) veteran bat. Both are 3 month rentals though, so I don't think age really factors into this discussion. I guess I'm looking for a creative way to still improve the offense this year at a position of need, without giving up a ton of prospect value for a guy that you are only going to have 3 months. Don't get me wrong - the thought of adding MM to our lineup gets me really excited, but I wonder if our higher end prospects wouldn't be better used to go after a guy that we'd have control over for a couple more years - but also someone that could make an enormous impact on this playoff run here in '18 (Realmuto, deGrom, Syndergaard, etc.).

[MilwaukeeBeers]

Reading that O's board I have a feeling A LOT of people there will be severely disappointed with the return. Maybe they could reach some of those packages if there was still QO tied draft pick compensation. Just not the way baseball teams do business anymore especially for rentals. I'd look to the J.D. deal last year as a baseline for rental bats. IMO I don't see Machado being a ton more impactful than him other than playing a premium position... albeit poorly. Hell Yu the crown jewel rental last year basically only got Willie Calhoun. I think Hiura is more than a fair bit better than him.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Oh no doubt. Woodruff is a real prospect and I guy I wouldn’t just give up on based on a small sample of MLB results.

 

Still this is Machado we are talking about so we will have to give up quality. Woodruff by all measures seems to be our 4th best prospect if you include Peralta still in that category.

 

Sorry, I guess I'm just getting antsy. I don't get how some posters are ready to throw Woodruff, Broxton and more at Machado, while the same guys are saying Burnes is untouchable. I mean is it simply because Burnes is less known? Both have solid middle of the rotation profiles. Woodruff is about 20 months older than Burnes. I mean, it's gotta be because Woodruff has ben kicking around the system longer, and already has MLB experience, right? Are we going to be looking at Burnes the same way at this time next year if he doesn't dominate at the MLB level? To me the two are interchangeable.

[reillymcshane]

My guess for an offer is Machado for Broxton and Woodruff. Might take another player, such as Wilkerson.

 

All three could step into their line up right now, and while none is going to be a superstar, they are the kinds of guys they should take chances on and ride out the good and bad times.

 

Just a guess.

 

I would love that deal but if that’s all it would take why hasn’t it happened already? It’s basically just Woodruff for the best offensive infielder in the game. Seems like a no brainer.

Actually, it's not just Woodruff for the best offensive infielder in the game.

 

It's six and a half years of Woodruff for 2-3 months of the best offensive infielder in the game. You can't take out the dynamics player control.

 

I also don't think Broxton is a throw away. He's an interesting player that provides some value. I think he could step in right now and play every day in Baltimore. How good he plays is another question. I think his swing-and-miss issues limit him - but with his good defense and power, he can potentially be an average starter.

 

As for nothing happening yet - no doubt Baltimore is trying to extract the best offer possible. Rarely do things like his happen quickly. They are simply waiting for someone to step up and offer something more to their liking. Will a Woodruff/Broxton based offer ever be to their liking? I don't know, but I don't see it as unreasonable.

[homer]

I feel like these deadline deals always skew towards at least one guy that "hurts" to part with. In this case that means at least one or more of Hirua, Burnes, Ortiz, Woodruff, or maybe Arcia (if you think his offense will come around). I would not want to give up Hiura for a rental but if the deal was Broxton, Woodruff, Ortiz and Arcia? Yeah I'd probably pull the trigger.

 

EDIT: Based on what D-backs gave up for JD Martinez last year, this might be too much. See my next post.

[reillymcshane]

Oh no doubt. Woodruff is a real prospect and I guy I wouldn’t just give up on based on a small sample of MLB results.

 

Still this is Machado we are talking about so we will have to give up quality. Woodruff by all measures seems to be our 4th best prospect if you include Peralta still in that category.

 

Sorry, I guess I'm just getting antsy. I don't get how some posters are ready to throw Woodruff, Broxton and more at Machado, while the same guys are saying Burnes is untouchable. I mean is it simply because Burnes is less known? Both have solid middle of the rotation profiles. Woodruff is about 20 months older than Burnes. I mean, it's gotta be because Woodruff has ben kicking around the system longer, and already has MLB experience, right? Are we going to be looking at Burnes the same way at this time next year if he doesn't dominate at the MLB level? To me the two are interchangeable.

That Milwaukee has moved Burnes to the bullpen - and brought him to Milwaukee - makes me think they would take him over Woodruff. Plus, the club's lack of use of Woodruff at times makes me wonder if they just don't trust him that much. Might be totally wrong. I might be reading into these moves stuff that totally doesn't exist. Just a guess.

 

I do believe you are right that Burnes are Woodruff are somewhat interchangeable. I think Burnes' success (at least up through last year) has made him better in the eyes of many fans.

[TooLiveBrew]

ETA: I think Lowrie has really cooled after his ridiculous start too? Could be wrong but I thought I recall that from a week or two back

He had a bad second half of May. But .842 OPS for June.

 

I like him as well, but I buy the argument that OAK are probably not ready to sell yet.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Oh no doubt. Woodruff is a real prospect and I guy I wouldn’t just give up on based on a small sample of MLB results.

 

Still this is Machado we are talking about so we will have to give up quality. Woodruff by all measures seems to be our 4th best prospect if you include Peralta still in that category.

 

Sorry, I guess I'm just getting antsy. I don't get how some posters are ready to throw Woodruff, Broxton and more at Machado, while the same guys are saying Burnes is untouchable. I mean is it simply because Burnes is less known? Both have solid middle of the rotation profiles. Woodruff is about 20 months older than Burnes. I mean, it's gotta be because Woodruff has ben kicking around the system longer, and already has MLB experience, right? Are we going to be looking at Burnes the same way at this time next year if he doesn't dominate at the MLB level? To me the two are interchangeable.

That Milwaukee has moved Burnes to the bullpen - and brought him to Milwaukee - makes me think they would take him over Woodruff. Plus, the club's lack of use of Woodruff at times makes me wonder if they just don't trust him that much. Might be totally wrong. I might be reading into these moves stuff that totally doesn't exist. Just a guess.

 

I do believe you are right that Burnes are Woodruff are somewhat interchangeable. I think Burnes' success (at least up through last year) has made him better in the eyes of many fans.

 

Woodruff has more heat on his fastball, while Burnes profiles to have better control. Perhaps they feel that his control helps him profile as a better short-term reliever? But it isn't like Woodruff is a slouch minor league career-wise. He's got a minor league Pitcher of the Year award to his credit. I think it's more a case of "What have you done for me lately?" and Burnes's steady minor league ascent and success has made him the current flavor of the month.

[homer]

By way of comparison, last year the D-Backs traded for JD Martinez and gave up Infielders Dawel Lugo, Sergio Alcantara and Jose King.

 

From Detroie Freep:

Though none of the players are ranked highly on prospect lists among all of baseball, the return fell in line with what many believed the Tigers would garner more than a month ago: A team’s upper-tier prospect and a couple middling prospects. None can be considered to have superstar potential. But all are viewed as having traits the team finds desirable for the future: Younger, athletic and faster.

 

Lugo was their #2 prospect. King was 18 years old and in rookie ball at time of trade and the other guy was a defensive specialist.

 

So based on that maybe it won't cost the Brewers much more than Woodruff and/or Ortiz and some low level dudes.

[mattyo]

I feel like these deadline deals always skew towards at least one guy that "hurts" to part with. In this case that means at least one or more of Hirua, Burnes, Ortiz, Woodruff, or maybe Arcia (if you think his offense will come around). I would not want to give up Hiura for a rental but if the deal was Broxton, Woodruff, Ortiz and Arcia? Yeah I'd probably pull the trigger.

 

EDIT: Based on what D-backs gave up for JD Martinez last year, this might be too much. See my next post.

 

The bolded is just way too much for me. I'm not putting Arcia, Woodruff and Ortiz in a trade for 3 months of a player. Offer Broxton/Santana, Woodruff/Ortiz, and a lottery ticket. If they ask for more, I wouldn't do it.

[StearnsFTW]

I went putzing through the orioles fan forums, I've also added a link below for those curious. I'll put it nicely and say they have some lofty expectation for their Machado return.

 

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/index.php?/topic/31981-machado-trade-expectations/&page=52

 

I personally started around page 42 and read through. The 2 craziest demands I saw were Arcia + Burnes + Ortiz and Hiura + Burnes + Peralta + Carmona. The latter of the two was by an admin. Occasionally there would be a voice of reasoning saying something like "Burnes is probably the best player we can hope for", but most are Hiura or bust...and would prefer to deal with the Dodgers.

 

From that fan message board:

I would make a deal around [Arcia] as a center piece. Arcia, Burns, Woodruff, and Zack Brown(not the singer) would be a solid deal.

 

*Closes laptop*

*Throws it into the Fox River*

 

Yep. I was going to mention that one too.

[Boomer5]

Oh no doubt. Woodruff is a real prospect and I guy I wouldn’t just give up on based on a small sample of MLB results.

 

Still this is Machado we are talking about so we will have to give up quality. Woodruff by all measures seems to be our 4th best prospect if you include Peralta still in that category.

 

Sorry, I guess I'm just getting antsy. I don't get how some posters are ready to throw Woodruff, Broxton and more at Machado, while the same guys are saying Burnes is untouchable. I mean is it simply because Burnes is less known? Both have solid middle of the rotation profiles. Woodruff is about 20 months older than Burnes. I mean, it's gotta be because Woodruff has ben kicking around the system longer, and already has MLB experience, right? Are we going to be looking at Burnes the same way at this time next year if he doesn't dominate at the MLB level? To me the two are interchangeable.

 

Prospects are only prospects until they aren’t. Woodruff hasn’t had success at the MLB level and even the Brewers themselves seem to have soured on him with the likes of Wilkerson getting innings over him. That is puzzling because Wilkerson isn’t our future so there is zero reason to have him starting July games in a pennant race over a top 100 prospect.

 

Yes it’s very small sample size and many pitchers look horrible in their first year. Burnes tore it up until he got to CS. I will say moving him to the pen seemed like an odd move considering we really need him to be a starter so I’m wondering about Milwaukee’s thinking here with him.

 

As for Machado, he is the best hitting infielder in the game at a position of need for us. I was reading that a WS win can be worth around $100M to a team, and a WS appearance over $50M, so for that I’d give up a good talent if I’m the Brewers.

[homer]

I feel like these deadline deals always skew towards at least one guy that "hurts" to part with. In this case that means at least one or more of Hirua, Burnes, Ortiz, Woodruff, or maybe Arcia (if you think his offense will come around). I would not want to give up Hiura for a rental but if the deal was Broxton, Woodruff, Ortiz and Arcia? Yeah I'd probably pull the trigger.

 

EDIT: Based on what D-backs gave up for JD Martinez last year, this might be too much. See my next post.

 

The bolded is just way too much for me. I'm not putting Arcia, Woodruff and Ortiz in a trade for 3 months of a player. Offer Broxton/Santana, Woodruff/Ortiz, and a lottery ticket. If they ask for more, I wouldn't do it.

 

 

Right. Hence my next sentence.

[tmwiese55]

Woodruff has had several good games at the MLB level. He's had a couple stinkers too. But I'd basically call 6 of his 8 starts last year as good/quality whatever you want to say for that he did his job at least at a passable level. Take out the last game of the year where gave up 6 runs and his numbers look drastically different. Take out his one start at Col this year and his number look way different. His last two starts here he went 5 innings 2 runs, and 4 innings 0 runs. I guess I'm just saying that in his first 10ish starts he hasn't looked overwhelmed to me and has held his own, it's not really fair to expect someone to dominate immediately. It took Nelson like 1.5 years to figure it out at this level and he was a couple years older, Woodruff reminds me of him quite a bit. And his fastball has hit 99 this year.

[Boomer5]

Infielders who can hit are worth more than outfielders who can hit.

[StearnsFTW]

Oh no doubt. Woodruff is a real prospect and I guy I wouldn’t just give up on based on a small sample of MLB results.

 

Still this is Machado we are talking about so we will have to give up quality. Woodruff by all measures seems to be our 4th best prospect if you include Peralta still in that category.

 

Sorry, I guess I'm just getting antsy. I don't get how some posters are ready to throw Woodruff, Broxton and more at Machado, while the same guys are saying Burnes is untouchable. I mean is it simply because Burnes is less known? Both have solid middle of the rotation profiles. Woodruff is about 20 months older than Burnes. I mean, it's gotta be because Woodruff has ben kicking around the system longer, and already has MLB experience, right? Are we going to be looking at Burnes the same way at this time next year if he doesn't dominate at the MLB level? To me the two are interchangeable.

 

Burnes was significantly better than Woodruff at a younger age at the same levels in the minors. That's why for me anyway. I still like Woodruff quite a bit as well, but I'd keep Burnes despite his struggles this year. I write that off to CS and him working on some things.