GatewayRedbirds.com

I just don't see how Longoria pushes the team much higher than Gyorko. At this stage. 85 million is a lot to give to declining players. Sure it'll be a slow decline, but still.

Why not just Mike Moustakas for 1-2 years for 11 per.

If I have 85 million for aging Longoria, I'm upgrading pitching and looking at Greinke types.

I think Moose is gonna get a lot more than your projection. Like, at the low end, 4 years $70 million. It's probably closer to 80-90 million. Still, might make more sense than Longoria, I'd agree.

Carp
Fowler
Pham
Ozuna
Moose
Molina (okay, he's probably batting 5th)
Dejong
Wong

with a bench of

Gyorko
Grichuk
Martinez
Kelly

That's a lot of offense.

Moose getting way more than Cozart makes zero sense. Cozart is old but he should net 7-8 WAR over his deal. Moose? Also probably 8-9 WAR tops over 3 years.

i agree, machado and moose make more sense by themselves than longoria.

the only reason i would want longoria, is if we take that contract on, the prospects we'd have to give up would be less in a deal with him and archer. If the trade were just for archer (and the rays are keeping longoria and his contract), the prospects return would be much higher IMO that we'd have to give up.

gyorko/longoria is a wash in my book, but it does allow gyorko to move to the super sub role he was intended for.

(and i don't see much difference in colome or the FA relievers out there still, so i don't care which way they go, as long as they get someone else)

Gyorko's "super sub" role will basically just be 1B when Carpenter needs rest? 2B if Wong falters? What about Jose Martinez, who also is pretty good?

I see no point for an expensive super sub that will only find a way into games regularly if Wong is bad again.

I think he should be traded to Toronto as part of a package for Donaldson so they won't feel like they are losing as much in a deal.

Big Amoco Sign wrote:I don't get how Cozart got 22 million less than Santana considering Santana's negative defensive value. They will both probably hover around 3 fWAR. Odd.

Cozart has been over 3 fWAR exactly once--last year. At 33, I don't think it is very likely he will be a 3-ish WAR player going forward. More likely in the 1-2 range he's always been, assuming any gains in offense offset the likely decrease he'll see defensively (as most mid-30's MI run into).

Santana's value is completely in his bat. It is hard to be too terrible at 1B where his defense would decline even further. And his offense is supported by skills that don't erode quite as quickly (BB rate and doubles power). I think Santana will easily out-pace Cozart by at least 1 fWAR per year.

Big Amoco Sign wrote:Gyorko's "super sub" role will basically just be 1B when Carpenter needs rest? 2B if Wong falters? What about Jose Martinez, who also is pretty good?

3B/2B/1B, with SS if you get in a bind. A nice power bat off the bench when he doesn't start. I like him as a hedge against what I view as the biggest weaknesses in the IF (Wong and DeJong). Ideally we'd have a better backup plan if DeJong falls off a cliff, but not to the point where we need to make a big investment.

Big Amoco Sign wrote:I just don't see how Longoria pushes the team much higher than Gyorko. At this stage. 85 million is a lot to give to declining players. Sure it'll be a slow decline, but still.

Why not just Mike Moustakas for 1-2 years for 11 per.

If I have 85 million for aging Longoria, I'm upgrading pitching and looking at Greinke types.

Well, if you could somehow get Moustakas at that rate, maybe, but he will get a ton more than that. And he is not very good either.

And it’s not Longoria vs. Gyorko, it’s likely Longoria + Gyorko, which is certainly an upgrade over Gyorko + Luke Voit.

Big Amoco Sign wrote:Longoria is still owed at least 85 million. No way.

Mike Leake money plus some change in the cushions.

Matt Moore traded to Rangers for prospects