With Ludwick out, a lot of support behind a Choo extension and the team's insistence on him remaining in CF, Chapman firmly entrenched in the bullpen and Cingrani looking dominant at AAA, would you pull the trigger on a trade of Chapman, Hamilton, and Cingrani for Giancarlo Stanton?
Would the Fish? (I'd have to believe they would strongly consider such a proposal)
Would you? (I'd offer 2 of those 3 along with a lesser player/prospect, but not all 3)
Last edited by Benihana; 04-05-2013 at 01:48 PM.
Go BLUE!!!
I would rather see if Choo can get extended before even thinking about trading Hamilton.
seems like 2 much to me but idk much about this stuff
If I'm the Marlins I don't know if I would do this because they aren't anywhere close to contending and I think Chapman is eligible for free agency in two years. I do think that offer would get Miami's attention, though.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/ShaneHorning
But what's interesting about this deal from their perspective is that it gives them exactly what they want-Originally Posted by BearcatShane
Loria wants to try to make things interesting for fans without shelling out a lot of dough. Chapman and Hamilton are undoubtedly two of the ten most exciting players in the game, and Cingrani adds a great arm (to Jose Fernandez who is already in the big leagues) under cheap control for many years.
Unlikely they trade Stanton in the next few months, but if they did I'd think this would be as attractive of a return as any for them.
From the Reds perspective, it just furthers the idea of the window for championship contention from now through 2016. After that, a herculean rebuilding effort would likely need to take place (ie what the Cubs have been doing for the last 18 months).
Go BLUE!!!
That's probably the only reason why they wouldn't accept it. Hamilton and Chapman are both very exciting players who would drum up some fan interest. I think it would suck to lose Chapman though. Having a closer like that is so relieving.
SIAP...
I believe Chapman is under the Reds control through 2016. I know he has an option for 2015, but if he turns down the option he goes to arbitration. He would then be eligible for arbitration again in 2016. He is not a free agent until 2017.
BlackPete Ibold (04-05-2013)
That's WAAAAAAAAAAAAY too much for Giancarlo.... are you crazy? Chapman for Stanton straight up would be fair enough let alone giving our top two prospects.
A closer for an MVP level player? Any MLB team would want more then that for a legit franchise player.
...the 2-2 to Woodsen and here it comes...and it is swung on and missed! And Tom Browning has pitched a perfect game! Twenty-seven outs in a row, and he is being mobbed by his teammates, just to the thirdbase side of the mound.
Hamilton and Cigrani are months away from MLB-ready. So we are giving them The hardest thrower in the game, a potential Cueto-esque starter and the fastest runner in the game for 40 hrs?
This is dumb and filling a hole we don't need. By playing in GABP, we don't need the ball launchers in order to score HRs. Heisey and Frasier show they have good enough power for us.
A guy who pitches 60 innings, a minor league starter who will not be Cueto-esque, and a guy who has not proven yet he can hit above AA for an MVP level player. No, that is not too much.
However, mostly for the reasons WOY pointed out, I don't think I would do it.
...the 2-2 to Woodsen and here it comes...and it is swung on and missed! And Tom Browning has pitched a perfect game! Twenty-seven outs in a row, and he is being mobbed by his teammates, just to the thirdbase side of the mound.
Just to reiterate, I wouldn't do all 3. But I would do 2 of the 3 plus a lesser piece. Heisey is not a starter on a playoff team, and he certainly does not have enough power (let alone other skills) to be a cleanup hitter. Stanton could easily hit 50 home runs in GABP. That's a lot more valuable than "the fastest runner" or "the hardest thrower" in the game.
And Cingrani is nothing like Cueto. If anyone, that's Daniel Corcino.
Go BLUE!!!
Hardest thrower doesn't mean much. Chapman is much more IMO, but he still is only out there 70-80 innings out of the year as closer. No one has compared Cingrani in the past, and while he had a great start last night, he is far from a sure thing. Finally, what does fastest runner have to do with anything? Sure having some speed is nice, and Billy is a good prospect, but we aren't just giving these three players away. We would be getting a 23 year old who OPSed 969 last year and we would control for at least three more years.
Payroll concerns are valid, but Stanton wouldn't be the guy we would be getting rid of if we were needing to clear payroll. Stanton and Votto in the same lineup is akin to Ruth and Gehrig.
As exciting as Chapman is coming into the 9th inning, and as excited as I am to see Hamilton in a Reds uniform some day..........I'd do Chapman, Hamilton and a lower minor leaguer. And only if Choo is extended first. The Fish would have to take on Ludwick's contract too.
The Reds are going to have an interesting dilemma at the end of this season or the end of next in terms of minor leaguers improving enough to move up to the majors. Payroll relief by trading away some major leaguers with big salaries or will these minor leaguers be trade pieces to add missing parts? Stay tuned.
Can you trade a player who's on the DL?
...the 2-2 to Woodsen and here it comes...and it is swung on and missed! And Tom Browning has pitched a perfect game! Twenty-seven outs in a row, and he is being mobbed by his teammates, just to the thirdbase side of the mound.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote