Tenacious D Posted July 13 Posted July 13 I think Rogers finishes out the season and isn’t re-signed. Quote
gehringer_2 Posted July 13 Posted July 13 3 hours ago, IdahoBert said: If Valencia works out as a catcher and has offensive potential, If indeed. Valencia gave up 4 SB in his 1st start. Quote
Sports_Freak Posted July 13 Posted July 13 7 hours ago, IdahoBert said: If Valencia works out as a catcher and has offensive potential, what becomes of Jake Rogers? And yeah, I know he can play first base but that means some change in Torkelson’s status with the team which is also complicated and I guess he could DH. It just seems like Jake is the odd man out. Could they get anything for Jake Rogers in a trade? Would a National League team take him? Because I wouldn’t want to face too many American League teams with him knowing as much as he does about this one. And of course, I have a soft spot in my heart for him. But I can’t see this team carrying three catchers for too long. They carried a useless outfielder for the first 3 months or so. Can Valencia be the RH PH bat on the bench? That power plays pretty well. Quote
Sports_Freak Posted July 13 Posted July 13 9 hours ago, monkeytargets39 said: Depends on what they do. Personally I think this season isn’t worth buying into just because of the bullpen. I’d rather get something for Skubal regardless. Between the CBA needing to be settled and our lack of expiring deals to use in trades next year—this is our opportunity to capitalize on adding some depth and talent We can't add any salary without subtracting some salary. Trading Skubal would free up $30 million or so....but I really wonder what we can get for a 3 month rental. The offers very well may be underwhelming. Quote
IdahoBert Posted July 13 Posted July 13 6 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: If indeed. Valencia gave up 4 SB in his 1st start. Quote
Tenacious D Posted July 13 Posted July 13 I don’t think we’ll see Valencia catch much. Phillies ran on him like a little league game. And he shouldn’t need to either with Dingler and Rogers healthy. Does he get time at 1B? Would amount to a benching of Tork, as they are both RH. Given that he’s an organizational guy, I can see them being OK using him as a part-time DH and pitch hitter. Quote
1984Echoes Posted July 13 Posted July 13 9 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: If indeed. Valencia gave up 4 SB in his 1st start. 5 hours ago, Sports_Freak said: They carried a useless outfielder for the first 3 months or so. Can Valencia be the RH PH bat on the bench? That power plays pretty well. Just a WAG: Valencia probably works out best as a PH/ DH/ Emergency 3rd catcher more than anything else... Quote
1984Echoes Posted July 13 Posted July 13 5 hours ago, Sports_Freak said: We can't add any salary without subtracting some salary. Trading Skubal would free up $30 million or so....but I really wonder what we can get for a 3 month rental. The offers very well may be underwhelming. Trading Jansen without taking any money back should free up approx. $3 mill I believe. Trading Flaherty without taking any money back should free up approx. $7 mill I believe. Just sayin'... Quote
4hzglory Posted July 13 Posted July 13 3 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said: Trading Jansen without taking any money back should free up approx. $3 mill I believe. Trading Flaherty without taking any money back should free up approx. $7 mill I believe. Just sayin'... The question is what it would cost to trade Jansen without taking any money back. It might be Anderson or similar, which I wouldn't be worried about, but that prospect cost needs to be added to whatever we are trading for with the freed up $ Quote
1984Echoes Posted July 13 Posted July 13 4 minutes ago, 4hzglory said: The question is what it would cost to trade Jansen without taking any money back. It might be Anderson or similar, which I wouldn't be worried about, but that prospect cost needs to be added to whatever we are trading for with the freed up $ Please show me a deadline trade in which a seller traded a veteran AND a prospect to a contending team, just to move the vet. I don't think that exists. There are teams that make low-cost trades at the deadline... Tampa, Seattle (if they go for it), Chicago/ Cleveland, Milwaukee, St. Louis... I think the cost to moving an underperforming veteran is... a no-chance low-minors non-prospect versus... getting a real prospect back. IMO, I think that THAT is what trading Jansen would cost. As for Jack: Flaherty has a 2.12 ERA, 1.04 WHIP, 10.3 K's/9, 3.4 K-BB ratio, and 0.24 HR's/9 since June 1st. I think he gets back an actual prospect. Maybe a middling one... but an actual one. IMO. Quote
1984Echoes Posted July 13 Posted July 13 PS: Jansen has been Dr. Jekyll/ Mr. Hyde this year. March/ April: 6+ ERA May: 3.52 ERA June: 6.75 ERA July: (3 1/3 inn's) 0.00 ERA. But there will be SOME team that thinks they can use him in a bullpen mix, with the hopes that he gets hot at the end of the season to help out. If the cost is a cheapie prospect, some team will do it. IMO. Quote
Sports_Freak Posted July 13 Posted July 13 34 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said: Just a WAG: Valencia probably works out best as a PH/ DH/ Emergency 3rd catcher more than anything else... Backup at 1st base? Quote
Sports_Freak Posted July 13 Posted July 13 14 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said: PS: Jansen has been Dr. Jekyll/ Mr. Hyde this year. March/ April: 6+ ERA May: 3.52 ERA June: 6.75 ERA July: (3 1/3 inn's) 0.00 ERA. But there will be SOME team that thinks they can use him in a bullpen mix, with the hopes that he gets hot at the end of the season to help out. If the cost is a cheapie prospect, some team will do it. IMO. I watch some Cubs games and they are pretty desperate for pitching. Not sure i wanna do that to them with Jansen though, I kinda like the Cubbies Quote
Sports_Freak Posted July 13 Posted July 13 21 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said: Please show me a deadline trade in which a seller traded a veteran AND a prospect to a contending team, just to move the vet. I don't think that exists. There are teams that make low-cost trades at the deadline... Tampa, Seattle (if they go for it), Chicago/ Cleveland, Milwaukee, St. Louis... I think the cost to moving an underperforming veteran is... a no-chance low-minors non-prospect versus... getting a real prospect back. IMO, I think that THAT is what trading Jansen would cost. As for Jack: Flaherty has a 2.12 ERA, 1.04 WHIP, 10.3 K's/9, 3.4 K-BB ratio, and 0.24 HR's/9 since June 1st. I think he gets back an actual prospect. Maybe a middling one... but an actual one. IMO. Maybe teams dont add a prospect but I seem to remember teams covering salaries. Just to get rid of players hurting the team. Addition by subtraction. Quote
4hzglory Posted July 13 Posted July 13 41 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said: PS: Jansen has been Dr. Jekyll/ Mr. Hyde this year. March/ April: 6+ ERA May: 3.52 ERA June: 6.75 ERA July: (3 1/3 inn's) 0.00 ERA. But there will be SOME team that thinks they can use him in a bullpen mix, with the hopes that he gets hot at the end of the season to help out. If the cost is a cheapie prospect, some team will do it. IMO. I guess I’d be a bit surprised if a contender actually wants Jansen and is willing to pay $3 plus mil for 60-70 games of him. I’m seeing him more as a salary dump to a non contender who then releases him to sign with whoever he wants. Quote
4hzglory Posted July 13 Posted July 13 25 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said: Maybe teams dont add a prospect but I seem to remember teams covering salaries. Just to get rid of players hurting the team. Addition by subtraction. This happens all the time, but doesn’t help us add to the team. Maybe we could get under the tax that way if we pick up 1/2 his remaining $3-3.5 mil Quote
theroundsquare Posted July 13 Posted July 13 I've always wanted to see some team act like a salary clearinghouse at the trade deadline. Like, Team A is interested in Player 1 on Team B, but not at Player 1's salary, and Team A is not willing to send assets (i.e., player contracts) to get Team B to pay down the salary. So Team B trades Player 1 and other assets to Team C; Team A can then send assets to Team C for Player 1. Team C absorbs enough of Player 1's salary to make this attractive to Team A. Team C pays a portion of Player 1's salary and gets assets from both Team A and Team B. If a team were willing to pay enough, it could collect a lot of prospects. I don't know if this would fly under the CBA. 1 Quote
chasfh Posted July 13 Posted July 13 On 7/11/2026 at 11:26 PM, Tenacious D said: I wonder why they don’t try Anderson at 1B in Toledo? 1 2 Quote
chasfh Posted July 13 Posted July 13 (edited) The idea of trading Jansen, Tork, or anyone else deemed to be hurting us to any other team—as a favor to us, I guess?—strikes me as wishful and fanciful. Edited July 13 by chasfh 2 Quote
monkeytargets39 Posted July 13 Posted July 13 8 minutes ago, chasfh said: The idea of trading Jansen, Tork, or anyone else deemed to be hurting us to any other team—as a favor to us, I guess?—strikes me as wishful and fanciful. If we did trade them we would almost certainly be taking on some other teams problem(s) in return. Quote
Shelton Posted July 13 Posted July 13 18 minutes ago, chasfh said: The idea of trading Jansen, Tork, or anyone else deemed to be hurting us to any other team—as a favor to us, I guess?—strikes me as wishful and fanciful. I think you’d need to find a team that somehow found a nugget a value in the player and contract. Like, maybe there is a second division team with a distinct need at 1B this year and next and would basically just take Tork for nothing. Maybe they think there is some small amount of of surplus value there and the cost control is nice to have. It’s also hard to envision Scott Harris being content with exceeding the tax limit by such a small amount, when the penalty is as significant as it is. So I do wonder their plan is in the event that they are not sellers. Maybe it’s as simple as getting enough guys back from the DL and their projections look good for that, and they don’t need to do much of anything. 1 Quote
Sports_Freak Posted July 13 Posted July 13 1 hour ago, 4hzglory said: This happens all the time, but doesn’t help us add to the team. Maybe we could get under the tax that way if we pick up 1/2 his remaining $3-3.5 mil I would think we would have a better chance moving Flaherty, his remaining salary and getting a mid prospect back. The Cubs would probably like acquiring Jack. But the way he's pitching...IDK. Keep him? Unless we could swing a deal for a good RH hitting CF? Thats a lot for Harris to accomplish. Maybe asking too much from him. Skubal, Jack and Jansen for PCA. Lol...in my dreams... Quote
Sports_Freak Posted July 13 Posted July 13 44 minutes ago, chasfh said: The idea of trading Jansen, Tork, or anyone else deemed to be hurting us to any other team—as a favor to us, I guess?—strikes me as wishful and fanciful. But that's the whole point of this thread. Fans speculating on what we can possibly get for Skubal at the deadline. I see 3 possibilities...he doesn't get traded. Or we trade him for a small return, since he's only a 2 month rental. Or we trade him for a huge haul of several can't-miss type outfielders. I'm not sure what we'll do with Riley and Carp if that happens...😆 Quote
NorthWoods Posted July 13 Posted July 13 4 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said: But that's the whole point of this thread. Fans speculating on what we can possibly get for Skubal at the deadline. I see 3 possibilities...he doesn't get traded. Or we trade him for a small return, since he's only a 2 month rental. Or we trade him for a huge haul of several can't-miss type outfielders. I'm not sure what we'll do with Riley and Carp if that happens...😆 RE: Huge haul - Riley to 1st, Carp to DH - Dodger/Clark/Dodger in the OF Tork/Outman/Wenceel/ to the world of DFA. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.