phillipmike
Registered User
- Oct 27, 2009
- 12,984
- 9,186
If this is the case then I think this deal is getting done and maybe should. Could land a guy like Brantley to replace Gurriel or sign Springer or Bradley and move Grichuk to LF.
Blue Jays Discussion: Off-season Pt II: It's the off-season in November!... Wait. That's normal for baseball.
- Thread starter The Nemesis
- Start date
- Status
If this is the case then I think this deal is getting done and maybe should. Could land a guy like Brantley to replace Gurriel or sign Springer or Bradley and move Grichuk to LF.
TheImpatientPanther
Registered User
SDig14
Registered User
I like the idea of one of those guys to play center and move Grichuk to a corner spot. Sign Springer and trade for and sign Lindor and we still keep our 1st round picks, Groshans, Martin and SWR.
Doesn't really address our pitching, but unfortunately the free agent market isn't great for pitching. They coukd either get 2 OK guys like Odorizzi and Walker perhaps or make a smaller trade for Lynn.
TheBeastCoast
Registered User
Anthrax442
Registered User
I dont see the appeal of losing Gurriel + assents to gain Lindor
Morgs
#16 #34 #44 #88 #91
I think my issue with Gurriel for Lindor (extended) is solely that people keep saying it's the base. I'd be down for Gurriel straight up for him, but unless we're also grabbing a guy like Plesac, McKenzie, or Carrasco I don't really see why we'd have to add anything major.
TheImpatientPanther
Registered User
Is it worth it for that length of time?
Feel CF and P over SS is needed more but just along for the ride.
We know we will get at least one top 10 free agent but Lindor just seems unlikely because of that deal imo.
Gotta pay Pearson, Bo, Vlad, Biggio in 3-4 years.
Itd be the biggest deal ever for Blue Jays. Gonna be a fun year ahead.
I keep harping on this every time the subject comes up, but moving a key part of the current roster who's in his prime at a position of organizational weakness with four years of cheap control for one year of Lindor makes no sense at all. None.
If a pitcher is coming back too, then it starts to make more sense. But one for one? If that's the deal (let alone Gurriel being "part" of the return to Cleveland) then I would happily move on and look elsewhere or wait to add a star position player next year.
If you're not that high on Gurriel, then it makes sense. But this all feels like people have honed in on a player they want and are just happy giving up whatever is necessary to make it happen regardless of whether or not it makes sense for the team.
I have 0 interest in Gurriel for Lindor.
You don't trade a 3.5 WAR player who makes 3.1M for a 5 WAR player who is going to make 25+, especially since Gurriel could be 4-5 WAR if he improves his throwing technique.
You don't trade a 3.5 WAR player who makes 3.1M for a 5 WAR player who is going to make 25+, especially since Gurriel could be 4-5 WAR if he improves his throwing technique.
SDig14
Registered User
Lindor is a significantly better all around player than Gurriel though.
You raise valid points, but I don't think Ross Atkins has ever shown willingness to get at a player at all costs. They have values attached to players for trades and contracts and walk away when it doesn't make sense.
If a major asset is traded, it's because Lindor is all but guaranteed to sign a long term deal. I don't even think they look at him without extension knowledge. So that would solve your years of control concern.
At that point, its a fit and roster construction conversation, but there would be other moves to consider before we could evaluate.
SDig14
Registered User
I do agree though it's tough to deal a very good young player with such cheap cost certainty for 3 more seasons. Seems to go against Atkins philosophy too.
Could gamble and see if any of these big names make it to free agency next year and just spend money instead.
Could gamble and see if any of these big names make it to free agency next year and just spend money instead.
One thing to keep in mind, Gurriel is a month older than Lindor.
Lindor has to come with an extension or it doesn't make sense.
Lindor has to come with an extension or it doesn't make sense.
TheBeastCoast
Registered User
If Lindor comes with an extension I am not against moving Lourdes for him. You would be adding a legit superstar with great defense at a premium position through his prime. Also has secondary effects of pushing Bo down the defensive line and making him a plus defender at 2nd base. Our top tier prospects should be fully untouchable though if Lourdes is who they have their eyes set on. That is no to Martin,SWR and Groshans in anyway.
Morgs
#16 #34 #44 #88 #91
So you think Gurriel is going to improve at age 27, but Lindor being 35 days younger than him will *only* be a 5 WAR player? The guy that was a 7.6 WAR player at 24? The argument shouldn't be whether we'd do the trade Gurriel for Lindor, because it should be obvious. The questions we should be asking are:
1) Can we extend Lindor? - If no, trade talks should be dead
2) Does Gurriel have to be involved? If yes, do we have to trade a significant piece as an "add-on"?
If they're asking for another significant piece in the deal, we should just look somewhere else. Gurriel is a guy who in two different seasons has shown to be a well-above average major league hitter. Despite his injuries and lack of track record that is a fantastic piece for a team like Cleveland who is looking to be competitive and spend as little money as possible. I'm okay with adding a borderline top-20 prospect, but anything else is overkill imo.
They could also just wait until next offseason to try to sign him, and the part being left out here is that the Lindor extension likely comes in at something like $30 million per year. So it's a budget discussion, too.
I even question Gurriel for Lindor straight up, to be honest. If Cleveland insists on a significant piece of the current roster, I just look elsewhere and try to make my big addition with someone willing to take prospects.
SDig14
Registered User
Sure, but you run the risk you get no one. All of Correa, Baez and Seager could sign extensions and Lindor could end up like Betts and sign right after being traded to someone else. No guarantee you even get a shot at any.
Gurriel as the main piece is an absolute no brainer. I would not however add even a top 10 prospect to him at all.
Then look elsewhere for trades... Baez, Bryant, Arenado, Story... there are plenty of guys rumoured to be on the block right now. Or sign someone like Springer, Lemahieu, or Realmuto now instead, since they have Bichette at SS and it's not a specific need they should be going all-out to acquire.
Morgs
#16 #34 #44 #88 #91
Honestly, I get it. I've been reading your posts the last few weeks and know what you mean. I think it's risky not only trading a guy trending up for a guy that just had his worst season but also a guy that's cheap cost controlled for four seasons for a guy that's going to get paid big money next year.
I personally would do it straight up (and think it's a no brainer) with the stipulation being we have an extension in place with Lindor. Obviously I'd prefer it to not be Gurriel, but I could live with it.
landy92mack29
Registered User
From a strength perspective it doesn't make a ton of sense to add Lindor as the Jays have a strong infield and the best prospects are also infielders while OF is a weakness both on the big league roster and in the system but as much as I like Gurriel and Hernandez they've always been streaky where Lindor is a consistent top 10 player with ties to the front office and a great leader to guide the young core. If they brought in Lindor it'd obviously have to be with an extension(8ish years in 25-30/yr range) but Bichette would likely move to 2B and Biggio to a corner outfield spot if they try Vlad back at 3B. having a switch hitter also brings value as Jays are kinda righty heavy. I'd rather move Hernandez+prospect(s) than just Gurriel straight up tbh
Why are people acting like we adon't have Bichette and Biggio up the middle? LGJ offensive profile fits in as a corner outfielder.
Our top 100 prospects are guys that can play 3B, 2B and CF.
Lindor gains a lot of his value defensively, at a time when his defense will start to decline.
LGJ will likely NOT decline defensively in LF (over the next 4 years).
Value per finite position.
Sign the guy next offseason if you want him. Unless you get Realmuto and Springer and another TOR pitcher, just be patient and use your financial flexibility to add talent (not prospects and current positive players). That's my opinion.
Morgs
#16 #34 #44 #88 #91
I also think an underrated factor with Lindor too is how he's the most likely to see a major rise in his hitting playing at Rogers compared to anyone else rumoured available. That and I really want a star switch-hitter on the Jays.
landy92mack29
Registered User
I do wish the Jays could wait and get one of the big fish next year but the reality seems that the Jays are the brides maid and never the bride when it comes to top FAs. Sure we got Ryu but forever they've been linked to top guys and never quite get them. Maybe the front office sees what the Dodgers did with Betts and the ties they have to Lindor as the most realistic chance at getting a big fish to commit long term to them before he can talk to the rest of the league.
stickty111
Registered User
- Jan 23, 2017
- 27,288
- 34,264
I don't think Jays would do that unless there was extension in place. For 1 year of Lindor with Gurriel going? No thanks. Move on if thats the case.
- Status
