Trade with Pirates

[clancyphile]

Just a thought: Suppose the Brewers went for a deal with Pittsburgh this offseason?

 

Brewers get:

1B Josh Bell

1B Martin Mason (minor league)

 

Pirates get:

1B/OF Eric Thames

RHP Zach Davies

OF Corey Ray

SS Eduardo Garcia

RHP Alec Bettinger

C Payton Henry

 

If the Crew keeps Moose and Grandal, then the lineup looks like this:

 

cf: Cain/Grisham

2b: Hiura

rf: Yelich

1b: Bell

3b: Moustakas

c: Grandal

lf: Braun/Grisham

ss: Arcia

Pitcher

[jerichoholicninja]

The Pirates should get a much better deal for Bell. As what should be a rebuilding club, they have no use for Thames or Davies. The minor leaguers we would give up are nothing special. As a Brewer fan, go ahead and make that deal but I just can't see anything like that happening.

[long ball]

No. Just flat out no.

 

There's no reason to invest significant trade capital in a first baseman. First baseman are freely available on the free agent market for reasonable prices.

 

Look at the best run teams in baseball. How many have invested heavily at first base? Rays? nope. Yankees? Nope. Astros? Nope. Dodgers? Nope.

[nate82]

The Pirates should get a much better deal for Bell. As what should be a rebuilding club, they have no use for Thames or Davies. The minor leaguers we would give up are nothing special. As a Brewer fan, go ahead and make that deal but I just can't see anything like that happening.

 

The Pirates are not going to get a lot for Bell. The 1B/DH market is rather saturated with quality players. They may not be as good as Bell but there is also not that much demand for 1B/DH type players.

 

At best I could see the Pirates getting 1 top 100 prospect for Bell as the headliner and then one or two players in the 125-150 range.

 

For a trade for Bell to work it would have to include Turang and Ray from the Brewers. That is just way too much to give up for Bell for me and I would rather use my trade capital on something else or not use it at all really.

[Brew crew 92]

No. Just flat out no.

 

There's no reason to invest significant trade capital in a first baseman. First baseman are freely available on the free agent market for reasonable prices.

 

Look at the best run teams in baseball. How many have invested heavily at first base? Rays? nope. Yankees? Nope. Astros? Nope. Dodgers? Nope.

 

Disagree.

This guy just tapping into his potential and just entering his prime, agree with Nate82, in that it won’t be prohibitive, prospects wise to get a deal done. But also think a deal doesn’t necessarily have to include Turang.

 

Bell > Ray & Lutz & Rasmussen & Henry & lottery.

[PeaveyFury]

 

Disagree.

This guy just tapping into his potential and just entering his prime, agree with Nate82, in that it won’t be prohibitive, prospects wise to get a deal done.

Both of these things can't be true, IMO. The Pirates are going to want a lot of a guy in his prime with 3 years of control and a nearly .950 OPS this year.

 

But yes, guys like Thames and Davies have zero value to the Pirates in such a trade.

[long ball]

No. Just flat out no.

 

There's no reason to invest significant trade capital in a first baseman. First baseman are freely available on the free agent market for reasonable prices.

 

Look at the best run teams in baseball. How many have invested heavily at first base? Rays? nope. Yankees? Nope. Astros? Nope. Dodgers? Nope.

 

Disagree.

This guy just tapping into his potential and just entering his prime, agree with Nate82, in that it won’t be prohibitive, prospects wise to get a deal done. But also think a deal doesn’t necessarily have to include Turang.

 

Bell > Ray & Lutz & Rasmussen & Henry & lottery.

 

Sure that all may be true in a vacuum, but what's the opportunity cost? Roster construction and asset management isn't just about trading player(s) x for player(s) y. Trading your best prospect chips for a readily available skillset is horrible strategy.

 

I'm also not even in love with the player. I know he's young, but the only two season he showed palatable power numbers for a first baseman just so happen to coincide with the juiced ball years of 2017 and 2019. Just a pass all around on the player and on the strategy behind it.

[RollieTime]

No. Just flat out no.

 

There's no reason to invest significant trade capital in a first baseman. First baseman are freely available on the free agent market for reasonable prices.

 

Look at the best run teams in baseball. How many have invested heavily at first base? Rays? nope. Yankees? Nope. Astros? Nope. Dodgers? Nope.

 

Disagree.

This guy just tapping into his potential and just entering his prime, agree with Nate82, in that it won’t be prohibitive, prospects wise to get a deal done. But also think a deal doesn’t necessarily have to include Turang.

 

Bell > Ray & Lutz & Rasmussen & Henry & lottery.

 

Sure that all may be true in a vacuum, but what's the opportunity cost? Roster construction and asset management isn't just about trading player(s) x for player(s) y. Trading your best prospect chips for a readily available skillset is horrible strategy.

 

I'm also not even in love with the player. I know he's young, but the only two season he showed palatable power numbers for a first baseman just so happen to coincide with the juiced ball years of 2017 and 2019. Just a pass all around on the player and on the strategy behind it.

 

Exactly this. Why give up a bunch of prospects for a guy now entering arbitration at a position where we already have a guy who can hit .250/.350/.850 and hit 30+ home runs if given 550 at bats, who we can just bring back for $7.5 million? Bell is a good player, but emptying the rest of our farm system for someone like him doesn’t make much sense. If we were talking about a premier SS who we would control for 3+ years and fill a huge void we have had for years, sure. But this wouldn’t make much sense in my opinion.

[tmwiese55]

It's probably also worth pointing that after Bell's ridiculous first 2 months of the season he went back to just being OK again rather than freak. I'm not saying he sucks or anything, just that those 2 months will probably be a huge outlier for him, not dissimilar to Jesus. He's going to finish in the 275/365/930 area this year. Chances are the reality going forward will be a tick below that in the 260/345 type world. IDK, similar to Shaw-ish type level before he fell apart, someone in the ballpark. Again, solid player I'd of course take and of course has the perk of being switch hitting and not a Shaw type who needs a platoon. But, probably should just delete those first couple months from the data.

[pacopete4]

Long ago I had a thread about trading for Bell when he was younger and up and coming. That time has passed now. If they really don't want Thames back, I'd go get Dominic Smith from the Mets.

[Brew crew 92]

Prospects can be replaced overnight in a re-tool/rebuild. It just depends on what Stearns & co. Think of Bell in MKE, surrounded by Yelich and Hiura, playing for a contender in front of 29,000-44,000 fans every game, with our short rt. Field fence, with 3 years of control, just entering his baseball prime. Personally, since I believe next year to be an absolute “ALL IN” I want him badly enough to give up 5 prospects. Good trade idea Clancy!