Angels closer Huston Street spoke with Ben Nicholson-Smith of Sportsnet.ca about his decision to ink a mid-season extension. Though he ultimately handed off the job of negotiating that deal to agent Alan Hendricks, much of the groundwork was laid by Street himself. He says the process was enjoyable, but noted that he learned from mistakes in how things were relayed to the media this spring. Street spoke at length about the compromises struck to reach the deal, explaining theĀ “interesting crossroad to be fascinated by the money but also to not be driven by it at all.”
- Athletics outfielder Coco Crisp is still struggling with the same neck issues that bothered him last year, but Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle reports (linksĀ toĀ Twitter) that surgery is off the table. Normally, that’s a good thing, but in this case the issue is that a surgical solution would very likely end Crisp’s playing career. Ultimately, Crisp may need another DL stint but is expected to be able to play with the injury.
- TheĀ Athletics are not interested in dealing catcher Stephen Vogt and are not moving now on pitcher Scott Kazmir, Peter Gammons of GammonsDaily.com reports.Ā “I’m not trading Vogt,” said GM Billy Beane.Ā “Period.” As for the veteran lefty Kazmir, Gammons writes that Beane and co. had intended to make him a qualifying offer but could ultimately consider a deal — though they’ve not yet had any action in that area.
- From the same report, Gammons says that theĀ Dodgers are generating plenty of interest in their younger players from clubs that have pitching to deal. TheĀ Phillies,Ā Reds, andĀ Athletics, among other teams,Ā are “scouring” the Los Angeles farm, per Gammons. The veteran journalist also adds that some other executives think that L.A. could potentially make a run at Cole Hamels by dangling interesting utilityman Enrique Hernandez, pitchers Zach Lee and Chris Anderson, and catcher Julian Leon to Philadelphia. While Gammons does not make clear whether his sources suggest that package would be enough, it certainly seems at face value that Philly would demand a headliner to top things off.
Travis Cantrell
I think a package centered around Guerrero could net the Dodgers a nice return. With Olivera coming in there is a surplus in the infield, keep Howie, Keep Turner, and let Kike fill in the holes. In order to get a pitcher worth having around for awhile we should deal from our strong suit. Zach Lee, Alex Guerrero and another young player which could be a variety of options. That gives us a good chance of receiving something worthy back instead of a injury prone player trying to earn a spot back
DavidL
Guerrero can opt out of his contract at the end of any season where he’s traded. So any team trading for Guerrero better be trying to win this season.
thegrayrace
This is true, but a deal could potentially be arranged in which Guerrero would agree to waive this clause if he was assured a starting role with another team.
There is also the possibility that Guerrero doesn’t opt out at all, since he’d essentially be walking away from a $15m/2 year deal.
DavidL
Guerrero only has $10 million left on his deal after the season. Some of the money was in a signing bonus he got up front.
Why would Guerrero agree to waive that clause? The way he’s playing he can probably get something like 4 years and $50 million as a free agent. He’d lose out on a lot of money waiving that clause. It’d be pretty stupid.
If another team won’t trade for him unless he waives that clause then he remains a Dodger. He might not get a lot of playing time but he’d still make the same money he makes now. He got that clause in the contract for a reason and I can’t see him waiving unless the other team promises to pay him A LOT of money.
thegrayrace
Guerrero is not very good. He had an incredibly hot two weeks, and has hit .222/.263/.352 since he started getting regular playing time. It’d take a pretty horrible GM to give the guy $50m/4 years, especially when he’s pretty much useless defensively.
But this is beside the point. If Guerrero stays with the Dodgers, he knows he is relegated to bench duty once Puig is back (and Ethier/SVS platoon full-time in LF). If it is important to Guerrero to be assured a regular starting role, he may agree to waive the opt out just for that opportunity with another team (if the Dodgers are otherwise unable to find a decent return for him as a rental, which is likely).
Baseball Reference has him owed $7,500,000 for 2016 and $7,500,000 for 2017. Perhaps your information is more accurate, though. I’m not sure.
DavidL
Baseball Reference averaged the contract. Look up the contract at Cot’s. Why would you assume it’s important to Guerrero he be assured a starting role? The one stipulation he put in his contract was he’d be a free agent if traded. So we know that’s important to him. Even if he can’t get $50 million, he can obviously get more than $10 million. I can’t see a baseball player giving up money for nothing, especially when he put in a stipulation that’d help him make that money. In your scenario he gets very little while the Dodgers and the other team get a lot.
I think the only way he’d agree to waive it is if the new team upped his contract by quite a lot. If not, he should be content making the same money on his preferred team, the Dodgers.
thegrayrace
If the alternative is the Dodgers not trading him at all – and he continuing to be relegated to a bench role – he wouldn’t be giving up money. He’d simply be gaining the opportunity to play more regularly.
That being said, sweetening the deal for Guerrero with another $1m or so would probably help persuade him if he’s become particularly attached to L.A. and/or his teammates.
DavidL
A million or so to give up 10 million or 20? I doubt he’s stupid or wants to make his decisions by what’s good for the Dodgers. He put that clause in the contract either because he only wanted to play for the Dodgers or to give himself an out if he were traded somewhere. That clause is unheard of in contracts so there’s no way he lets it go for increased playing time.
If he were my client I’d tell the dodgers to give me an additional two years at $8 million per year to wave the clause. If not the Dodgers will trade other guys and that’ll give Guerrero playing time. I see no way he does the Dodgers a favor.
stymeedone
Guerrero’s opt out if traded essentially makes him a rental and lowers his value. Someone else will need to be traded to max the return.
Sky14
Have to imagine the Phils would want more than that for Hamels. Some solid prospects there but if that’s all it took them one would think Hamels would have been traded by now.
DavidL
If those executives don’t work for the Phillies I don’t see how those executives know more than you or I. It’s interesting how executives have been saying the Phillies’ price is too high are now saying the Phillies will settle for pennies on the dollar in a deal that doesn’t address the teams needs. It sounds to me like they listed the Dodgers’ best prospects after the top 3 and decided that since the Dodgers can afford Hamels that’d be the price.
fred-3
Those are like the Dodgers best prospects after the top 5, which is why there’s no way that happens.
Brixton G.
I personally don’t think the Dodgers can get Hamels even if they took all the money, without parting with 1 of the big 3.
MattHollidaysForearms
That’s pretty dang bold.
Brixton G.
Obviously if they offered their 4-7 prospects, then maybe, sure. But Gammons named 4 decent prospects and they really don’t justify a Hamels deal.
DavidL
None of those prospects are on any pre-season top 100 list and none were even in the Dodgers’ pre-season top 5. It’s hard to believe someone wouldn’t offer at least one good prospect.
thegrayrace
Pederson is no longer a prospect, though, and Corey Seager may be the best prospect in baseball (and the Dodgers have a clear need for him). Urias is the best left-handed pitching prospect in baseball, arguably not worth Hamels either.
That being said, I think everyone else is on the table, including Holmes. The Dodgers farm system is really strong right now, and their #4-#7 guys may better than many teams top prospects.
DavidL
I’m guessing you think those guys who weren’t as good as other team’s prospects two months ago are now better than them. But your judgement is irrelevant. It’s Gillick and Amaro. We don’t know what their judgement is, but we can use the top 100 lists as a guide.
The only other Dodger prospect any of the top 100 lists liked was Grant Holmes and he isn’t even in that deal. So you’re asking the Phillies to take 0 players who are top 100 prospects. Reportedly Amaro wanted a top 20 prospect and another top 100 prospect. Do you really think he’s going to take a deal with no top 100 prospects now after the way Hamels is pitching? Come on. The price is probably even higher now.
Maybe the Dodgers can trade for Johnny Cueto and his sore elbow.
thegrayrace
Julio Urias has been the top LHP prospect in baseball for about a year now according to several rankings. Not my opinion, but the opinion of MLB, Baseball America, Baseball Prospectus, etc. That being said, I don’t think he is entirely untouchable, but I have doubts that the Dodgers would move him for Hamels. They seem to view Urias as being able to contribute this season.
As for Seager, a couple guys that were ahead of him (Bryant, Russell) are now in the Major Leagues. Buxton and Correa are the only two other guys who were regularly ranked ahead of Seager, and Buxton’s stock has probably fallen a bit. Correa may have more value than Seager, but it is pretty close. Mid-season rankings will be interesting to see. Seager is untouchable, though. The Dodgers traded for Rollins as a stop-gap for Seager, who they clearly view as a franchise player.
As for Holmes, I said in my initial comment that he should be on the table. The Dodgers have a couple of other prospects that are likely to be featured in mid-season Top 100s, such as De Leon.
willi
Thank God, somebody with a measure of sanity on trading a Prospect for a proven All-Star.
dylanp5030
That’s probably not getting it done. I don’t see a deal being made with LA because they will never see eye to eye with value (and I think both sides are justified to be clear).
Brixton G.
Hamels, Harang, Leake, Cueto and Kazmir I’m guessing is the reason for said scouting? That “package” for Hamels seems like it would be a good deal if you removed one of Leon or Anderson and added the headliner that Amaro wants. Obviously Amaro isn’t in charge of a Hamels deal anymore, but Gillick isn’t accepting that.
garret
cueto>hamels
Brixton G.
Obviously, but what relevance does that have
scann
He would rather the Dodgers trade for Cueto….because he’s the better pitcher a this point maybe???
Brixton G.
I wasn’t really saying they should trade for Hamels, rather than having my input on whats in the article. I’d rather have Cueto too. Hes a lesser commitment and would cost half the prospects.
willi
Trade a Good prospect for 20 starts, the Casino owners in Las Vegas love that thinking!
rouscher
I think Cueto to LA is a bad deal. If I were LA, I’d get Hamels and Harang. sign Cueto over the winter. Because there’s no way barring a Reds run that he’s not trade to NYY, SF, BOS or a pitching needing team. So he’s not going to require draft pick compensation. get Hamels and Harang. That gives you insurance incase Zach splits this winter and give you the possibility of Kershaw, Grienk, Hamels, Ryu, Harang this year. And possibly Kershaw, Hamels, Ryu, Cueto, McCarthy next year if he’s healthy and a bonus draft pick from Greinke. Plus the dodgers are going to need more than one of Cueto and Hamels and picking up both Hamels and Harang and bringing Cueto in over the fall seems to me like a better deal.
Kyle E.
Yeah I can’t see the Dodgers trading for hamels and signing cueto. Sure they have the prospects and money to make it happen, but that’s not how they prefer to build based on previous comments made by the front office.
The long term goal has been to lower payroll by building from within and expanding scouting. Trust me as a Dodgers fan I wouldn’t mind this scenario, but would be pissed if they traded one of Pederson, Seagar or Urias for Hamels.
stymeedone
half the cost for less than a quarter of the service time. Seems like full price for 4X+ the control is the better buy.
Brixton G.
Not when 4x the team control costs x55 the money. (Cueto is owed 5M for the 2nd half of the season)
stymeedone
That would put the Dodgers back in the same position of needing pitching next year. Signing a top FA pitcher will cost more than Hamels yearly amount and require more years than Hamels is signed for. If you look at what Cueto will require to sign, he’s not less money than Hamels, he’s going to be more.
Brixton G.
but the money you spend on Cueto isn’t going to outweight the amount of prospects that separate a Cueto from a Hamels. You can get a Cueto without one of the big 3. You can’t get Hamels without 1 of the big 3.
stymeedone
but you can get Hamels thru only his age 34 season. You will have to take Cueto thru his age 37 season. How much do you want to spend on dead seasons? Chances are 2 or more of the “big 3” will not be “big” anyway. Could be the next Andre Ether, oh boy!
Brixton G.
A career 122 OPS+ whos currently has an OPS of .937 and has a career OPS of .823? Oh no! How terrible!
stymeedone
No, not terrible, just ordinary. Would you trade Ethier for Hamels?
Brixton G.
no because that wouldn’t make sense for Philadelphia. If Joc Pederson had the career that Ethier had, I don’t think anyone would be complaining.
stymeedone
What I am saying, Pederson is more likely to be ordinary than a superstar. If you can get superstar value back, trade him. Philly will be able to sell a “potential” superstar to their fan base, which is why they would do the trade. If the Dodgers get Hamels back, I don’t think anyone would be complaining.
garret
it seems everyone is writing about blockbuster deals for hamels but not a lot for cueto.
Brixton G.
because Cueto is a 2 month rental and wouldn’t require a “blockbuster” to obtain. He’d cost a top prospect and a B level, while Hamels would cost a top prospect and multiple secondary pieces.
DavidL
If Cueto goes on the disabled list he’ll cost a team even less.
stymeedone
hamels control>cueto rental
TheMick
Any deal for Hamels will have to include at least one blue chip prospect. After that a deal can be filled in with the Anderson’s and Leon’s of the world. I think the Dodgers may part with Urias with the expectation of keeping Greinke. That will give them 3 TOR arms for the next 3-4 years at least while the Dodgers cultivate other pitching prospects. No other team is in win now mode as much as the Dodgers considering their payroll and recent playoff performances.
scann
The Dodger’s should just part with Julio Urias and other for Hamel’s at this point…..this team is built too win now….
stl_cards16
They’re not trading Urias. No reason to even talk about it.
willi
Correct, Dodgers are built to win Now , that means potential mean nothing . All that means trades be made that can be made up later in the offseason or Thru Free agency.
Mark D
Agreed, maybe not for Hamels but people are acting like Billy Beane didn’t trade a far superior prospect to Urias in Addison Russell for 1.5 years of Samardzija.
arbfuldodger
just because Billy Beane did something like that doesn’t mean the Dodger FO has to follow suit.
stymeedone
Yeah! LA fans can be just as stubborn as Boston fans! Urias for Trout-No reason to even talk about it. Pederson for King Felix-No reason to talk about it.
Steven Garrison
I think they end up trading one of seager or Urias to start the deal
MattHollidaysForearms
Ya how about no.
TrueBlue44
The Dodgers are built to win now and in the future… Why go after Hamels when we can get a Kazmir or Harang type for far less? We are winning games without McCarthy and Ryu… AND Kershaw is sucking. We really don’t need to make a trade at this point.
R.D.
The 3 heading monster the A’s had behind the plate was such an asset, they’re really fortunate that Vogt has done so well so far. Had he struggled or been injured, trading jaso and Norris would have looked awful. I still think it was a bad idea.
stymeedone
If its working, how can it be a bad idea? Maybe what they got back for Jaso and Norris can be questioned, but choosing Vogt as the one to keep shouldn’t be.
Mark D
Jaso hasn’t even played for the Rays, and the A’s got Zobrist and Clippard for him, who have, so based on 2015, the A’s won that trade handily. Not to mention Phegley is a much better defensive C than any of the 3.
stymeedone
I never said I had a problem with the trades. Still, two months into the season is a bit early to decide who won a trade. Never thought of Phegley as a good defensive C. He looked more like a back up with the White Sox, like he was up because he could hit a bit. Flowers was the better catcher defensively.
Mark D
My point is that Jaso & Norris for Zobrist, Clippard & Hahn is a fantastic win for the A’s no matter what and Jaso isn’t even a C anymore due to concussions. At the end of the year Jaso & Norris won’t even have half the combined WAR of the three they got for them, and Phegley & Vogt will also outperform Jaso & Norris too.
stymeedone
My point is that Zobrist and Clippard are pending FA’s. Jaso & Norris will still be producing next year for their teams. How Hahn does will have a lot to do with the long term outcome of the trade.
Mark D
I wouldn’t be so sure with Jaso, and its clear we aren’t talking about the same thing: I’m talking about 2015 only and youre talking long term.
stymeedone
I was talking about the trade. If you look only at the current year, you could have received the next Mike Trout as a prospect, and be considered the loser. If Jaso gets healthy and becomes another Victor Martinez as a DH next year, shouldn’t it count as to who wins a trade?
Mark D
It’s very surprising to me that the Dodgers haven’t worked out a new deal for Greinke yet, him being very great and all.
They do need a rental and Cueto for Urias straight up is a fine deal for both sides in my opinion.
TheMick
I think Urias and 2-3 secondary pieces for Hamels is a better deal because you know for a fact Hamels will be back for the next 3-4 years. With Cueto there will be a bidding war and the Dodgers aren’t assured to sign him.
Steven Garrison
Urias and zach lee + others , I think will get the deal done
arbfuldodger
If the Dodger FO was willing to do that deal, Hamels would already be in LA…ain’t gonna happen. My bet is Kazmir due to both Friedman & Zaidi familiarity with him (AF in TB & FZ in Oak) for something less than Seager or Urias.
Mark D
I can see that happening too, especially now Graveman looks like he’s found his rhythm back to where he was unhittable in spring and Pomeranz, Nolin & Bassitt all looking like nice bets to end up as quality SPs. Kazmir is a near-lock to be traded for that reason alone, and it might not even be for prospects but MLB players.
mpguy
I’m always amused when fans of a team suggest a trade for another team’s star player. These almost always involve dealing a basket of junk, or at best low-ceiling players (quantity) for one or more star players (quality).
Hamels comes with almost four years of team control at (what is, by today’s standards) a reasonable price for a proven #1 starter. If the Dodgers really want him, Corey Seager should be the starting point. They should add several more top prospects, including at least one more major league ready (or nearly ready) player.
There is absolutely NO reason for the Phillies to be in a hurry to trade Hamels. For them to do so, any offer has to knock them off their feet.
Steven Garrison
I think Urias , Zach Lee and others gets the deal done for hamels, I have him going to the dodgers or the cubs but all I know is that the phillies want a catcher in return. they have a bright future with their rotation in the farm, Biddle nola and the young pitchers they got in return for rollins and bryd
Mark D
I agree, Addison Russell was a consensus top 3 prospect when he was traded for not even a top 10 SP. Seager & Urias for Hamels is totally fair.
Daniel Morairity
Look cole hamels is going to the rangers and the rangers pitching staff has been not so good this year so the rangers need hamels and here is how I see it:
Rangers Acquire:
SP Cole Hamels
Cash
Phillies Acquire:
Colby Lewis
Jorge Alfaro
Luke Jackson
Rougned odor
Look at that deal