Unofficial Hot Stove News and Rumor Discussion Thread

[wolfboy]

I'd rather include Broxton and an OF prospect and go for Kemp if the Dodgers can make the money work.

I don't see how putting another bad contract and an OF prospect we don't have in the pot sweetens the deal.

[Benihana]

I don't see how putting another bad contract and an OF prospect we don't have in the pot sweetens the deal.

We don't have OF prospects?

[westofyou]

Will LA forget they non tendered him in 2011?

FYI - If the Reds trade Broxton, the 2016 option becomes a mutual option with a $2MM buyout (Currently it's a team with a 1 Million buyout)

[OneManBand]

I'm not sure we are looking for a deal at this point.. My guess is we are staying put. Phillips is the only piece I could see moved. Infante could be signed or Hamilton moves back to 2nd. I'd think Gardner or Ethier would be viable options in a deal.. just really think we will see much of the garbage fodder signings that we've seen up to this point..

[Gallen5862]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

Nationals Shopping Danny Espinosa

By Luke Adams [December 9 at 4:25pm CST]

The Nationals are shopping Danny Espinosa in trade talks, according to Jeff Passan of Yahoo! Sports (via Twitter). Passan adds that if the Nats are unable to find a deal they like for Espinosa, the infielder could fill the utility role vacated by Steve Lombardozzi.

After a couple solid seasons in Washington, Espinosa saw his production fall off a cliff in 2013 due in part to injuries. In 2011 and 2012, he was an everyday player for the Nats, hitting 38 homers with a .727 OPS in over 1300 plate appearances.

GM Mike Rizzo told reporters today, including Dan Kolko of MASN.com (Twitter link), that the Nats will be "open-minded" and won't be afraid to make a trade. However, Adam Kilgore of the Washington Post says (via Twitter) that he'd be surprised if the team moves Espinosa, having already rebuffed teams like the Rays and Cardinals, who have tried to buy low.

[wolfboy]

We don't have OF prospects?

Poorly worded on my part, but what prospect is going to sweeten the deal for LA to take Phillips and Broxton's terrible contract and give us money and Kemp? Are you talking about giving up Hamilton, Winker, or Ervin?

[Benihana]

Poorly worded on my part, but what prospect is going to sweeten the deal for LA to take Phillips and Broxton's terrible contract and give us money and Kemp? Are you talking about giving up Hamilton, Winker, or Ervin?

I would definitely give up Yorman in that deal (even money). Would consider one of the others if the Dodgers insisted.

It'd be a huge risk on Kemp's health, but one that would likely be worth taking IMO. If he returns to form, he's a top 5 player in the game. If he doesn't, you're not on the hook for any more money than you were before - you just don't have Phillips or Broxton anymore. I like Phillips, but that might be a risk worth taking.

[757690]

I would definitely give up Yorman in that deal (even money). Would consider one of the others if the Dodgers insisted.

It'd be a huge risk on Kemp's health, but one that would likely be worth taking IMO. If he returns to form, he's a top 5 player in the game. If he doesn't, you're not on the hook for any more money than you were before - you just don't have Phillips or Broxton anymore. I like Phillips, but that might be a risk worth taking.

No one will give the Dodgers more than Broxton and a prospect for Kemp. It's very rare for players to fully recover from the injuries he's had, especially when there are multiple injuries. If he was a free agent, he'd get a one year deal full of incentives.

[redsmetz]

One thing is certain with Walt if he says something like this it usually has a purpose. My guess is this is part of a relatively feeble ploy to gain some leverage in re-signing Choo. I suspect something to happen for the Reds before Christmas almost assuredly and quite possibly much sooner than that. But my guess is it will not be Choo, Boras will still likely get more for Choo than what the Reds can/should offer. But I find it curious that Walt at this stage seems to think he has any chance to re-sign him at all. Am I misreading the Tea leaves?

I've been meaning to spring off this post since the weekend. I agree that Walt generally has purpose to his comments. I don't think it's a "feeble ploy to gain some leverage." I think Walt fully understands the present market for and you say it quite clearly (and correctly, I think) that his number will be more than the Reds can or should offer. That said, I can't completely dismiss that Choo won't come off that mark with the Reds. It's certainly unlikely, but not necessarily out of the question. Until the door is completely closed, it serves no purpose for the Reds to say the door is entirely closed. Heck, the same could be said for Arroyo, but that's an entirely different question.

[Mitri]

Few contracts in baseball are as toxic as Matt Kemp's. My guess is Walt stays away from it like the plague. Let Seattle take on that albatross.

Either would be a great fit if his deal ended in two years. It's that $37MM over the last two years that looks really, really ugly.

I really like Gardner and think he'd be perfect at the top of the lineup. Would like it a lot better if there were two years of control. Yanks would have to kick in a nice prospect for Walt to consider a Bailey-Gardner swap.

[Wonderful Monds]

I might think about Kemp if LA threw some serious money along with him.

[Mario-Rijo]

I've been meaning to spring off this post since the weekend. I agree that Walt generally has purpose to his comments. I don't think it's a "feeble ploy to gain some leverage." I think Walt fully understands the present market for and you say it quite clearly (and correctly, I think) that his number will be more than the Reds can or should offer. That said, I can't completely dismiss that Choo won't come off that mark with the Reds. It's certainly unlikely, but not necessarily out of the question. Until the door is completely closed, it serves no purpose for the Reds to say the door is entirely closed. Heck, the same could be said for Arroyo, but that's an entirely different question.

I think it's certainly getting a bit more interesting with Choo but I think he is still well outside of what we should be investing in an OF right now, unless some sizable contracts are moved.

[Mike Honcho]

If Choo is asking for 7/142-ish numbers how much room is there to go down? You're screwed by either the years or the AAV.

[757690]

If Choo is asking for 7/142-ish numbers how much room is there to go down? You're screwed by either the years or the AAV.

I think the Reds can fit him in somehow at around $17-20M, by trading some other contracts. However, I don't think they want to go past 4 years at that salary, due to his eventual decline.

[OneManBand]

I think the Reds can fit him in somehow at around $17-20M, by trading some other contracts. However, I don't think they want to go past 4 years at that salary, due to his eventual decline.

I hate that type of money.. that is to much coin for someone we could of resigned mid season for around 12 million per year.. if it wasn't for Ellsbury and his crazy deal Choo's price tag wouldn't have exceeded 15 million per year..