Deadline Deals: Buy, Sell or Stand Pat

Another trade deadline has come and gone, with some teams very active and others largely bystanders. This post is for discussion of which teams helped or hurt themselves the most and whether standing pat is a defensible strategy for contenders in today’s game.

Here are the deals that have gone down over the past two weeks.

August 1, 2016

 July 31, 2016

July 30, 2016

July 29, 2016

July 28, 2016

July 27, 2016

July 26, 2016

July 25, 2016

July 24, 2016

July 23, 2016

July 22, 2016

July 20, 2016

July 19, 2016

July 18, 2016

From the above, can probably group teams as follows:

  • Strong buyers: Indians, Rangers, Cubs
  • Buyers: Blue Jays, Marlins, Orioles, Giants, Dodgers, Mets
  • Active but posture uncertain: Mariners, Angels, Astros
  • Sellers: Athletics, Reds, Twins, Brewers, Rays
  • Strong Sellers: Yankees, Padres, Pirates
  • Mostly On the Sidelines (selected teams): Nationals, Tigers, White Sox, Cardinals, Red Sox

Seeing the Yankees as strong sellers will take some getting used to, but their actions make sense for a team that had too many clubs ahead of them to have a reasonable expectation of claiming a division title. New York stood at .500 on deadline day, the first time in a generation (since 1992) that the Pinstripers have not held a winning record at that juncture. The prospects acquired in their various deals could stand New York in good stead as they attempt to build a club with a core of young stars, something that’s been missing for most of this century.

Surprises include the Astros not trying to upgrade to reel in the Rangers who were very active in their quest to maintain their division lead. Discerning Seattle’s intentions was a bit difficult, as was the Angels failing to be more aggressive in acquiring prospects to build around Mike Trout. Trout is under contract only through 2020, so the Angels may be figuring that’s not enough time to rebuild and will instead again be active in the post-season free agency market as has been their wont (and, often, their lament).

The Nationals and Red Sox were contending teams that chose to stand pat for the most part. Boston had earlier acquired Drew Pomeranz to bolster their pitching rotation, while Washington did make one key acquisition of Mark Melancon for their bullpen. Further updates may have been seen as not worth the risk to team chemistry, though Boston might still find themselves a bit short in starting pitching come September.

Your turn now. Which teams do you think most benefited from their trades, and which let opportunities slip by?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

16 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Hartvig
Hartvig
8 years ago

While I have to admit that there are a great many of the minor leaguers and even several major leaguers involved that I’m not all that familiar with I still feel compelled as a baseball fan to weigh in with my opinion. In the AL I think Texas did the best among the buyers with Toronto coming in second (largely because I don’t think they gave up a lot) Among the sellers, it looks like New York did quite well for themselves. And I have no idea what the Twins were trying to do but whatever it was I don’t… Read more »

Hartvig
Hartvig
8 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

The NL is harder to categorize but it does look like some of the teams at the top- Chicago, San Francisco & Los Angeles- did make some moves to strengthen themselves.

I don’t know what to make of Pittsburg & San Diego but the Phillies seem to have missed the boat entirely.

Doug
Doug
8 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

I think San Diego did some addition by subtraction in unloading Kemp, Upton and Cashner. The first two are expensive, not contributing a lot and on the wrong side of 30. A couple of years ago, Cashner looked like he might develop into a decent pitcher but he’s regressed this year and last. Still, he’ll be a UFA next year and only 30 so likely some teams will pay for the chance that he could recover his form of a couple years ago. OTOH, to get rid of Cashner, the Friars had to part with two youngish arms (Guerrero and… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
8 years ago

Most of the young players—mostly pitchers—whom the Yankees acquired don’t seem that promising, and none are starters, unless I overlooked something. I think part of the strategy was to unload payroll, freeing up $$$ for the free agent market later. So the build-through-youth approach may not really be what they had in mind. I haven’t looked at their current stable of contracted prospects, though, so there may be some potential stars already in the system.

Doug
Doug
8 years ago

ESPN in their Mets/Yankees broadcast yesterday indicated that the Yankees now had 6 of the top 50 rated prospects, albeit most of the six in the bottom half of that bracket. Still, that’s a decent complement for a single organization.

But, you’re right that the Yankees will still be buyers on the FA market. Brian Cashman, guesting on the ESPN telecast, was very open that Edwin Encarnacion is in his sights.

David P
David P
8 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Here’s Baseball America’s top 100 list, updated after the trade deadline. Yankees and Brewers each have 7 of the top 100. And nice to see that my Indians still have 5 of the top 100, even after trading two top 100 prospects to the Yankees.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/updated-midseason-top-100-trades/#gK1AyGBYkfXtX7bk.97

David P
David P
8 years ago

Justus Sheffield (acquired in the Andrew Miller trade) is a starter. And Dillon Tate (acquired in the Carlos Beltran trade) is also a starter though I read he’s going to be shifted to the bullpen in an attempt to get him back on track.

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
8 years ago

I loved what Milwaukee did – and I’m sure the Rangers did, too. I love win-win trades – especially when they involve my team!

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
8 years ago

Tilson made his Major League début for the ChiSox tonight, collected his first MLB hit, and left with an injury.

Kahuna Tuna
Kahuna Tuna
8 years ago

It felt so strange to the Padres not to have an albatross Braves contract on their books that they could wait only four days before taking on another one.

David P
David P
8 years ago

BTW, I’m curious what others thought about the “clusterfuck” surrounding the non-trade of Lucroy to the Indians. Dave Cameron had an article on Fangraphs saying that no one was to blame for what happened. But that strikes me as wrong.

Everyone knew that Lucroy had a no-trade clause in his contract that included the Indians. Why didn’t either team insist on finding out whether or not (or under what circumstances) Lucroy would accept the trade, before announcing the trade to the world? Shouldn’t that have been worked into the trade negotiations?

Mike L
Mike L
8 years ago
Reply to  David P

David P, I wondered about that as well, because there was no reason for Lucroy to give up a no-trade without compensation. You wonder if there wasn’t more to the negotiation we aren’t hearing about. Lucroy asked for the club option for 17 to be waived, which Cleveland obviously wasn’t going to go for. But there had to be something short of that he would have accepted but presumably wasn’t offered. I read a couple of places that Lucroy was worried about what position he would play–given his age, his next contract would have highest value if he were still… Read more »

David P
David P
8 years ago
Reply to  Mike L

Mike L – Thanks for your thoughts. The more I think about this, the more a Lucroy deal seems impossible between the Indians and Brewers. And the fact that neither organization could figure this out is a bit shocking. Seems like there are 5 possibilities: 1) Lucroy says flat out no (I read that he wanted to be closer to his home state of Louisiana). 2) Lucroy says yes (as you pointed out, there was little reason for Lucroy to do this). 3) Lucroy asks the Indians to drop the ’17 option. In this scenario, the Brewers walk away because… Read more »

David P
David P
8 years ago

Indians prospect Francisco Mejia – who was part of the aborted Lucroy trade – has a 47 game hitting streak. It’s the longest major or minor league hit streak in 62 years.

The last player with a longer hit streak? Oddly, his name was Roman Mejias. Roman had a 55 game hit streak in 1954 and later had a 9 year major league career with the Pirates, Astros, and Red Sox.

Francisco’s hit streak is still going. He had the night off last night but will presumably go for #48 today.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
8 years ago
Reply to  David P

The streak started on 5.27.
The first 24 games were at A ball, slashing:

.430 / .465 / .710 / 1.174

Then a promotion to A+, and 23 more games with modest numbers (considering the streak):

.333 / .353 / .479 / .832
_________________________

Overall, over the 47 games:

.381 / .408 / .593 / 1.001