MLB Trades

Posted by: tyler

MLB Trades - 07/26/13 01:57 PM

Feel free to post rumors or speculations or even actual trades in here.

Soriano just went back to the Bronx today.
Posted by: jayhwk01

Re: MLB Trades - 07/26/13 07:59 PM

Sox interested in Hoch. Please let a deal happen!
Posted by: kylecof11

Re: MLB Trades - 07/27/13 09:41 AM

Originally Posted By: jayhwk01
Sox interested in Hoch. Please let a deal happen!


Have you seen his ERA? Or his WHIP of 0.87? Or his 38/10 K/BB ratio? I've constantly been a hater of Hochevar in the bullpen, but as a reliever he has been absolutely fantastic.
Posted by: christgs80

Re: MLB Trades - 07/27/13 09:45 AM

As Rany said yesterday...trading Hoch would be a no-brainer.

Trade him, move Wade Davis down to the bullpen (a carbon copy of Hoch - terrible starter, fantastic reliever), and either Duffy or Paulino (or hell, really anybody) takes Davis' spot in the rotation.

You get prospects....and actually improve the team this season.

You don't do that very often.

And it's such a no-brainer that it almost for sure probably won't happen.
Posted by: jayhwk01

Re: MLB Trades - 07/27/13 11:26 AM

Originally Posted By: kylecof11
Originally Posted By: jayhwk01
Sox interested in Hoch. Please let a deal happen!


Have you seen his ERA? Or his WHIP of 0.87? Or his 38/10 K/BB ratio? I've constantly been a hater of Hochevar in the bullpen, but as a reliever he has been absolutely fantastic.


I have seen his numbers. I have also watched closely when he pitches and what situations he comes into. There is a reason for those numbers. He has no question been better but he also has had zero expectations and virtually no inherited base runners except on a few occasions and generally is coming in at the bottom of the batting order and for pinch hitters. This has not always been the situation but definitely more often than not.
Wade Davis is clearly not a starter either and not only has better "stuff" than Hoch but virtually identical numbers (Last year) AND pitched in stress situations with Tampa Bay. On top of that he is a "major" piece of the Myers trade so DM needs Davis to pan out somewhere. Given all that you trade Hoch because he is clearly the most volatile, has the worst of the numbers overall, and frankly has worn out his welcome a long time ago. No need to keep them both.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: MLB Trades - 07/27/13 12:22 PM

Not sure that Davis (or, frankly, Holland) has better stuff than Hochevar.
Posted by: rockchalker5

Re: MLB Trades - 07/27/13 03:27 PM

Whether its Hoch or someone else. We have a surplus in our pen and we need to trade one of them and get some return.
Posted by: jayhwk01

Re: MLB Trades - 07/27/13 04:15 PM

Originally Posted By: JFish26
Not sure that Davis (or, frankly, Holland) has better stuff than Hochevar.


I think Davis clearly has better stuff than Hoch and he certainly has a better head on his shoulders in my opinion.

Either way we do not need all three of them and depending on the return I would not be upset to see 2 of the 3 gone as long as one of them was named Hochevar.
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: MLB Trades - 07/27/13 08:26 PM

If the Royals are at .500 on July 31, I won't be terribly distraught if Dayton doesn't deal Santana. I would hope that he still would have by that time. But it won't break my heart if he embraces .500 and tries to play to 84 or 85 wins.

However, if one of the back-end bullpen guys (Hoch, Holland, likely) is not traded by the deadline, no matter the record, to make this team better either now or in the future, I will be baffled and annoyed. Now is the optimal time to unload Hoch's ridiculous contract.
Posted by: CrimsonNBlue

Re: MLB Trades - 07/28/13 10:24 PM

Royals fans on twitter have been pretty vocal for a few days about dealing for this guy.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/k/kendrho01.shtml


edit: He'll be expensive though. IMO, I'd rather give up Duffy than Zimmer or Ventura. Will cost us Herrera or something else as well.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: MLB Trades - 07/28/13 11:53 PM

Why should it cost so much?
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 02:23 AM

Do you think they could get him for Herrera, Giavotella, and a decent minor league pitching prospect?

I don't really know how much the Angels value Kendrick, but he has been a very good 2B the last few years.

I don't want Dayton to trade for him though. He is 30, expensive, and really doesn't have anywhere to go but down. Yes, he can help this year. But the Royals aren't going to make the playoffs this year, let alone compete for a WS (though if they do the former, the latter is infinitely more plausible).

I don't really know that I'm in the minority, but I feel like the attitude of Royals fans, collectively, is changing rapidly. I still want Dayton to sell. Holding on to Santana does the team much less good than does trading him. The closer the trade deadline gets, the more they are going to get offered, and if Dayton doesn't deal him, I'll be disappointed. Not surprised though. It's easy to sell a fanbase the plausibility of success when the team is on a roll.

With Tampa surging, I would think the Red Sox would be very tempted to add Santana and Holland (or Hoch) before the deadline. You don't want to be in that 1 game joke of a wild card.
Posted by: christgs80

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 08:45 AM

Kendrick would be a huge upgrade at 2B for the team, and is an ideal #2 hitter in a lineup.

He's a fantastic fastball hitter, and putting him in front of Hosmer/Butler would only help him see more.

But....having said that....I certainly wouldn't trade one of our top pitching prospects for him.
Posted by: CrimsonNBlue

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 09:37 AM

It's going to take something like 38-22 to sniff the wild card, so of course I'd rather deal Santana than deal for Kendrick. We did what we had to do over the last 10, but Detroit/Cleveland didn't cooperate.

Supposedly, LA wants a SP prospect in return. I think that's expensive for us.

If Dayton deals Myers AND Zimmer in a single calendar year and we still miss the playoffs, well, I'll probably do nothing except cuss a lot.
Posted by: rockchalker5

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 09:53 AM

I like Kendrick quite a bit. Hes 30 but I think he has a couple years left of being a solid big leaguer...a big upgrade for us.

I've been hearing Ricky Weeks name coming up lately.
Posted by: christgs80

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 10:00 AM

Not a fan of Weeks at all.

If Kendrick could be had for a lower-level pitching prospect, I'd be ok with that.

But I have a feeling it would cost more than I'd like to see.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 10:36 AM

Originally Posted By: CrimsonNBlue
It's going to take something like 38-22 to sniff the wild card, so of course I'd rather deal Santana than deal for Kendrick. We did what we had to do over the last 10, but Detroit/Cleveland didn't cooperate.

Supposedly, LA wants a SP prospect in return. I think that's expensive for us.

If Dayton deals Myers AND Zimmer in a single calendar year and we still miss the playoffs, well, I'll probably do nothing except cuss a lot.


And certainly my hope is that the conversation at One Royal Way this morning is a realistic and honest one. If, right now, you're good enough to finish 81-81, what can and should be done to tilt that by another 7 or 8 wins? You won't be able to accomplish that on a pure value basis, so you'll have to get lucky, but can you realistically add 3-5 value wins over the rest of the year without setting your system on fire?

I think the answer is no. But trading Santana and Hochevar represents a way to give yourself a chance to get lucky this year while strengthening for next year and beyond. That's the right course of action.
Posted by: kylecof11

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 11:22 AM

Detroit got a solid bullpen arm in Veras from Houston. Veras has a very nice K/BB ration with 44/14 in just 43 innings. 2.93 ERA. Good pickup for a shaky Detroit bullpen.
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 12:06 PM

Veras is a good pickup indeed for Detroit. I know a lot of people are adamantly against trading within the division, but I wouldn't have minded seeing the Royals deal Holland or Hoch to the Tigers. I think Boston is a good destination for both Santana and Hoch thouh.
Posted by: rockchalker5

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 03:04 PM

Originally Posted By: christgs80
Not a fan of Weeks at all.

If Kendrick could be had for a lower-level pitching prospect, I'd be ok with that.

But I have a feeling it would cost more than I'd like to see.



Kendrick is too expensive....you don't like Weeks....then who do you like?

Your going to have to give something up for a guy like Kendrick. Ventura for Kendrick is a very possible deal. A pitching prospect for a proven big leaguer. We aren't going to be able to just throw them our trash and get a good player. Not how it works.
Posted by: rockchalker5

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 03:07 PM

Originally Posted By: KUSPORTSFAN93

Yes, he can help this year. But the Royals aren't going to make the playoffs this year, let alone compete for a WS (though if they do the former, the latter is infinitely more plausible).


How would Howie Kendrick not help us next year? He wouldn't be a rent-a-player.
Posted by: christgs80

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 03:16 PM

Originally Posted By: rockchalker5
Originally Posted By: christgs80
Not a fan of Weeks at all.

If Kendrick could be had for a lower-level pitching prospect, I'd be ok with that.

But I have a feeling it would cost more than I'd like to see.



Kendrick is too expensive....you don't like Weeks....then who do you like?

Your going to have to give something up for a guy like Kendrick. Ventura for Kendrick is a very possible deal. A pitching prospect for a proven big leaguer. We aren't going to be able to just throw them our trash and get a good player. Not how it works.


You know my stance on this...I want the Royals to be sellers, not buyers.

But if they insist on being a buyer...then Kendrick I guess might be the best guy out there.

I think they should give Kolton Wong from the Cardinals organization a long look.

Maybe even a Gordon Beckham or a Dustin Ackley.

I just think Weeks is extremely overpaid for a guy whose main asset is his power, but brings very little else to the table.

I have no issue with Kendrick...he'd be a massive upgrade for this team, but at what price?
Posted by: JFish26

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 03:25 PM

I'm a sucker for prospects, but if the price would be equal in terms of outgoing talent, I'd take Ackley over Kendrick in a hot second. In fact, I'd offer to eat some bad Seattle contracts to make it work.
Posted by: rockchalker5

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 04:01 PM

I don't like Weeks that much either, I was just bringing his name up for arguments sake. I like Ackley, and I like Wong a lot. Beckham...not so much.

Thats my point on the price of Kendrick or one of these other guys. Its going to involve Ventura, Zimmer, Duffy or one of those guys.

I would take Kendrick for Ventura in a heartbeat. But not sure if even that would get it done.
Posted by: christgs80

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 04:07 PM

If the Royals don't think Ventura projects out as a starting pitcher in the big leagues, then by all means, trading him for Kendrick makes a lot of sense.

I'm still confused as to why they've moved Will Smith into the bullpen seemingly permanently. Stupid move.

If they think he's only a reliever at best, and plan on using him as one, then they should trade him as well.
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: MLB Trades - 07/29/13 04:20 PM

Originally Posted By: rockchalker5
Originally Posted By: KUSPORTSFAN93

Yes, he can help this year. But the Royals aren't going to make the playoffs this year, let alone compete for a WS (though if they do the former, the latter is infinitely more plausible).


How would Howie Kendrick not help us next year? He wouldn't be a rent-a-player.


I never said--or even implied--that Kendrick wouldn't help the Royals next year. But $10M (his salary in 2014 and 2015) is a steep price. And who are the Angels going to hold out for? Duffy? I've seen a package of Duffy, Cuthbert, and Brickhouse suggested. No thanks. And that's probably the lower end of what they would have to give for him.

Other teams are going to offer more. You know, teams that actually have a legitimate chance at winning now (note: winning now is NOT 81-81 or 84-78).

I'm with Chris on this one. Kendrick is probably the best move that the Royals can make if they go into buy mode. But there is no reason for them to go into buy mode. It's going to take a lot more than adding Kendrick (a 3-4 WAR guy) to make them a playoff team. Seriously. Yes, they have 32 games remaining against teams currently under .500 (some very much so), but they have also been under .500 for most of the season. They also have a lot of tough series left. 11 games against Detroit. 4 games against Boston. 3 against Washington. 3 against Texas.

If I'm the Royals, I deal Santana and Hoch for prospects. Good prospects. Because someone will be willing to give them up. Then you don't have Santana's $13.5M on the payroll or Hochevar's $5M and maybe you go get a long-term starting pitcher or a right fielder or a second baseman in free agency this off-season and bolster your farm system.

I consider it a win if the Royals get a good haul for Santana and Hoch, and sign a big fish (not someone like Cano, but how about a Garza? A Pence?) this off-season, assuming they don't get re-signed by their current clubs.

At the end of the day, it comes down to one simple question. Do you believe in the Royals' ability to finish the season 40-20? Like JFish said, that essentially means sweeping more series than you lose. I don't. That is why I believe they should be selling, despite this hot streak (that probably will continue against Minnesota). If you believe that this team, which has never had a 40-20 stretch in the Dayton Moore era, can finish 40-20, I applaud your optimism and respect your desire for them to buy now.

You can also look at it in a more complicated way:

Can Kansas City be 8 games better than Detroit the rest of the way? Absolutely not. So I'll rule out winning the division.

Can Kansas City be 3 games better than New York the rest of the way? Probably. Frankly, the Yankees success this year is shocking to me. Can KC be 5 games better than Cleveland the rest of the way? I'll give that a 50/50 shot. 4 games better than Texas? Probably not. If the postseason started today, none of those three teams would be in it.

6 games better than Baltimore? Maybe. I doubt it. That is their one and only hope. The 2nd wildcard spot. Because Boston and Tampa are in. Detroit is in. Oakland is almost certainly in. Their one thread of hope is being better than Baltimore, Texas, Cleveland, and New York the rest of the way. And not just better. Significantly better.

I see the writing on the wall. Santana isn't going to be dealt, nor is Hochevar. But they ought to be.
Posted by: kylecof11

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 08:14 AM

If KC got Gordon Beckham, it would be tough for me to watch them. Absolutely cannot stand how bad he is. I would really like to do a Santana for Wong type of deal since Carpenter is tearing it up for the Cards and their starting pitching could use some help. It would help out both teams right away considering KC needs a good 2nd baseman and STL needs to pull away from Pit and Cin in their division race.
Posted by: pwhittemore

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 04:03 PM

Apparently the Royals are on Kendrick's no trade clause so not sure if that's viable.
Posted by: christgs80

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 04:07 PM

I'm seeing that too.

They must have some inclination that Kendrick would waive that no-trade to come to KC if they are having conversations about Kendrick, no?

Or is Dayton that dumb?
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 04:18 PM

No, I imagine it would be a 'waive the NTC' sort of thing. I can't imagine KC is any less desirable a team to play for than the Angels right now.
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 04:19 PM

Peavy and Norris scratched from starts tonight.
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 04:38 PM

Seems like a lot of thought out there right now around the Braves that they should make a push for Santana.
Posted by: christgs80

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 04:56 PM

At this point, I'm resigned to the fact that there's probably zero chance the Royals are sellers.
Posted by: PHOGUSHER

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 05:02 PM

Again I dont really know who is out there that would greatly improve them. Stand pat...finish the season .500 or better. Then make some deals in the off season.
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 05:26 PM

Originally Posted By: christgs80
At this point, I'm resigned to the fact that there's probably zero chance the Royals are sellers.


Sadly, I am too. I hope that Boston or Atlanta (or someone less obvious) will blow Dayton away tonight or tomorrow morning and the Royals will be rid of Santana (and possibly Hoch). Just show us that you understand how improbable this is Dayton. The smart fans aren't going to be angry with you for selling again, especially selling a rental. If you understand the mathematical improbability of the Royals' playoff hopes, you won't be mad.
Posted by: rockchalker5

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 06:26 PM

Originally Posted By: PHOGUSHER
Again I dont really know who is out there that would greatly improve them. Stand pat...finish the season .500 or better. Then make some deals in the off season.


I think we should still be looking to add a 2nd baseman. I'll go to war with what we have in the OF right now. I wanna see Santana stay...unless we got an offer that we can't refuse, which we'll never know.

I still think there is a lot of value for this franchise to make a push and win as many games as possible this year. If you can show other players that you wanna win, maybe signing free agents and re-signing our own guys will be a little easier in the future. Maybe we can actually sell some tickets in August in September for a change.
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 06:33 PM

Kansas City is a baseball town. If they Royals go .500 this year (not an accomplishment), people will still be excited for next year. More so than usual. You don't need Santana to do that. Or you shouldn't. They play some good teams the rest of the way, but some pretty bad ones too. They play teams like Minnesota and CWS (and Miami) a lot.

I don't understand what possible value you see in keeping Ervin on for two months, unless you believe that the Royals are going to make the playoffs. After this year, no team like the Royals should want any part of trying to sign him to a long-term deal. His career didn't being in 2013. He has been up and down for years. And he is going to bring a lot of money this off-season.
Posted by: 41and2since94

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 08:05 PM

Originally Posted By: KUSPORTSFAN93
I hope that Boston or Atlanta (or someone less obvious) will blow Dayton away tonight or tomorrow morning

Well, I wasn't gonna go that far, but...
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 09:29 PM

Originally Posted By: 41and2since94
Originally Posted By: KUSPORTSFAN93
I hope that Boston or Atlanta (or someone less obvious) will blow Dayton away tonight or tomorrow morning

Well, I wasn't gonna go that far, but...


The reports are that the Royals won't sell unless they are "blown away."
Posted by: rockchalker5

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 09:46 PM

Houch not pitching the 8th. Hopefully hes being traded at the moment
Posted by: rockchalker5

Re: MLB Trades - 07/30/13 09:58 PM

So the angels acquired Grant Green. So they are trading Kendrick for sure right?

http://www.minorleagueball.com/2013/7/9/4505616/prospect-of-the-day-grant-green-2b-oakland-athletics