Master Index of Archived Threads


Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Benjamin Grimm Jan 24 2020 10:51 AM

There's been some muted buzz about the Mets maybe going for Nolan Arenado. Rockies said to like Brandon Nimmo and Francisco Alvarez. Would that, combined with salary relief, be enough? Do the Mets want to take on Arenado's contract? Would he waive the opt-out clause? Is there anything at all to this? I'm thinking it's not likely, but let's have a thread anyway in case this heats up.

Centerfield Jan 24 2020 01:22 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

From the other thread. =Centerfield post_id=30441 time=1579896831 user_id=65] Now let's do Arenado. First of all, if the Mets could afford $35 million a year for a third baseman, they would have been in on Rendon. They weren't, and they cannot. And nothing could be dumber than passing on Rendon because you don't want to pay money, then trading for Arenado, taking on his salary, his optout, and giving up young talent. And if the Rockies ask for McNeil, you hang up and never speak to them again. Nolan Arenado will be 29 in April. His career OPS is .897. He plays half his games in Coors. Arenado gives you out of the world defense at 3B. WAR of 5.7 in 2019. Jeff McNeil will be 28 in April. His career OPS is .896. He plays his home games at Citi. McNeil doesn't play nearly as well on D, but can play 4 different positions well. WAR of 5.0. McNeil makes nothing and is under control for 5 more years. Arenado makes $35 million, has a contract paying him that until he's 35, and has an optout after 2021. It would be insane to pass on Rendon, then trade McNeil for Arenado.

Imagine not even bidding for Machado, not even bidding for Rendon, then trading Jeff McNeil for Nolan Arenado and taking on that salary anyway.



The question isn't whether you prefer Arenado or McNeil. The question is whether you would prefer Arenado, or Jeff McNeil + $35 Million.



And I get McNeil could fall off a cliff. But if he remains productive, you get have McNeil under team control for his age 28-32 seasons. That's his prime.

seawolf17 Jan 24 2020 01:57 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Arenado can fall off a cliff too. And then you're stuck with a fucking albatross of a contract. HARD. PASS. I'm with you.

Centerfield Jan 24 2020 03:37 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

=seawolf17 post_id=30447 time=1579899452 user_id=91] Arenado can fall off a cliff too. And then you're stuck with a fucking albatross of a contract. HARD. PASS. I'm with you.

I miss that Stallone movie poster.



HARD PASS 2

He's With You



Wait, did I just give away that Stallone dies at the end of Hard Pass 1?

smg58 Jan 24 2020 04:40 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

McNeil had a higher OPS+ than Arenado each of the last two seasons. That's a non-starter. Brandon Nimmo has a higher career OPS+ than Arenado. Can we please stop mentioning him in every rumor? But if they'd take Cano, they could have any prospects they'd like.

Ceetar Jan 24 2020 04:53 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

=smg58 post_id=30457 time=1579909227 user_id=62] McNeil had a higher OPS+ than Arenado each of the last two seasons. That's a non-starter. Brandon Nimmo has a higher career OPS+ than Arenado. Can we please stop mentioning him in every rumor? But if they'd take Cano, they could have any prospects they'd like.

Cano outhit Alonso in the second half.

smg58 Jan 25 2020 12:02 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

And that's exactly the kind of selling point we should be going with.

Edgy MD Jan 25 2020 09:31 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Arenado can fall off a cliff too. And then you're stuck with a fucking albatross of a contract. HARD. PASS. I'm with you. I miss that Stallone movie poster. HARD PASS 2 He's With You Wait, did I just give away that Stallone dies at the end of Hard Pass 1? https://metsrostercentral.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/hard-pass.jpg>

Frayed Knot Jan 30 2020 01:59 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Only tangentially about Arenado, but a few days ago Kris Bryant lost his hearing about trying to get his service time increased. The Cubs, you might remember, decided that Bryant wasn't quite ready back in 2015 -- this despite being the consensus #1 prospect in baseball that winter and coming off a full season of upper minors (AA & AAA) where slashed north of 300/400/600 across 600+ PA -- so they kept him down in the minors exactly one day longer than was necessary to deny him a full year of ML service time. Bryant complained but the ruling said that rules are rules. This is likely to get altered during the upcoming CBA negotiations but the ship has sailed on those who signed under the current guidelines. Anyway, the upshot of all this is that Bryant still has two more seasons before he can become a FA ... ANNNND that there's been talk that the Cubs & Rox have discussed a straight-up Bryant for Arenado swap. The Rox would get out from under Arenado's contract (although if they wanted to do that they shouldn't have signed it just one year ago) and the Cubs would get a player for the longer term and at a known cost. There is a 2021 opt-out in Arenado's deal which means that this could just wind up as a swap of two 28 y/o guys (Bryant is 8 months younger) who play the same position and are under contract for the next two seasons, so there is a lot of symmetry there. And you'd have to figure that the odds of Bryant re-upping w/the Cubs are pretty low right about now. Don't know that there is anything more than 'What If' speculation here, but talk about your challenge trades!!

Centerfield Jan 30 2020 04:00 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

I'm sure it makes sense on some level, but if Chicago were willing to pay $35M/year for a third baseman, wouldn't they be better off just paying their own? It seems like Chicago may be entering into the early stages of a rebuild. My guess is that they keep Bryant at least for the early part of this year, then trade him for high-ceiling prospects. I'm not sure what is going on with Arenado. It could be that there is enough ill-will that Colorado has to move him, but that's an awfully short honeymoon. I'd guess they have to eat some money if they want value back for him.

smg58 Jan 30 2020 07:08 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

=Centerfield post_id=30819 time=1580425236 user_id=65] I'm sure it makes sense on some level, but if Chicago were willing to pay $35M/year for a third baseman, wouldn't they be better off just paying their own?

Right. I see both teams looking at rebuilds, so I don't see a swap making sense. Plus the Cubs would go from spending basically nothing all offseason to taking on a few hundred million to arguably make their team worse.

Fman99 Jan 30 2020 08:49 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Edgy MD wrote: https://metsrostercentral.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/hard-pass.jpg> Assuming this still is from "Cop Land," and I will go to the mats with anyone and say that this is literally Sly's best film. In a movie with DeNiro, Liotta, Keitel and others and he totally holds up his end. Strong drama.

Edgy MD Jan 30 2020 09:08 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

It's from Hard Pass. Duh!

nymr83 Jan 31 2020 06:48 AM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

I'd love to get Arenado, I think his defense, and the Mets need for defense in general, is being severely underrated here. I'd trade McNeil straight up because he doesnt have a position (well, other than the one that Cano is needlessly occupying)

LWFS Jan 31 2020 07:39 AM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Relative to their salaries, McNeil is worth more than Arenado. If you want to monetize that, well, you'll want to get more than a great player with a terrible, player-friendly deal. Edgy MD wrote: https://metsrostercentral.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/hard-pass.jpg> Assuming this still is from "Cop Land," and I will go to the mats with anyone and say that this is literally Sly's best film. In a movie with DeNiro, Liotta, Keitel and others and he totally holds up his end. Strong drama. Funny that in a thread about a potential trade for a Coloradan, you'd forget ROCKY.

smg58 Jan 31 2020 09:12 AM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

It's not close. McNeil had a higher OPS+ than Arenado the last two seasons (which basically means if you factor in ballpark, McNeil's been the better hitter), and he appears to be a pretty good defensive third baseman too. So, no. If you had that kind of money to throw around, you could have gotten a second ace starter or a #2 instead of a #5 or #6. I suggested Cano and prospects earlier, which was half-serious -- if Brodie said they have to take Cano and they returned his call, I'd be as surprised as anybody -- but I can't think of any other scenario where the Mets get Arenado, don't take on more money than they appear willing to spend, and unequivocally improve the team.

Centerfield Jan 31 2020 09:15 AM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

=smg58 post_id=30861 time=1580487129 user_id=62] It's not close. McNeil had a higher OPS+ than Arenado the last two seasons (which basically means if you factor in ballpark, McNeil's been the better hitter), and he appears to be a pretty good defensive third baseman too. So, no. If you had that kind of money to throw around, you could have gotten a second ace starter or a #2 instead of a #5 or #6. I suggested Cano and prospects earlier, which was half-serious -- if Brodie said they have to take Cano and they returned his call, I'd be as surprised as anybody -- but I can't think of any other scenario where the Mets get Arenado, don't take on more money than they appear willing to spend, and unequivocally improve the team.

Yup. This.



If you factor in the Arenado opt-out after 2021, the idea of giving up McNeil is laughable.

nymr83 Jan 31 2020 11:10 AM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

There are plenty of better things the Mets could do with the money that they aren't spending, but I didn't say "I'd take Arenado for McNeil versus signing Cole", I said I'd do Arenado for McNeil, without consideration of other potential moves.

Edgy MD Jan 31 2020 11:37 AM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

One advantage that trading for a phat contract has over signing someone to one, is that you're only exposed to risk of catastrophe (David Wright's broken spine, for instance) for three or so years, vs. as opposed to seven or so.

Johnny Lunchbucket Jan 31 2020 11:42 AM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

=Centerfield post_id=30862 time=1580487334 user_id=65] =smg58 post_id=30861 time=1580487129 user_id=62] It's not close. McNeil had a higher OPS+ than Arenado the last two seasons (which basically means if you factor in ballpark, McNeil's been the better hitter), and he appears to be a pretty good defensive third baseman too. So, no. If you had that kind of money to throw around, you could have gotten a second ace starter or a #2 instead of a #5 or #6. I suggested Cano and prospects earlier, which was half-serious -- if Brodie said they have to take Cano and they returned his call, I'd be as surprised as anybody -- but I can't think of any other scenario where the Mets get Arenado, don't take on more money than they appear willing to spend, and unequivocally improve the team.

Yup. This.



If you factor in the Arenado opt-out after 2021, the idea of giving up McNeil is laughable.


I wouldn't laugh a bit. Arenado is a serious guy. Look if we can make a deal without McNeil all the better but I wouldn't spit at the prospect. And I'll bet most baseball execs make that deal in a second, except perhaps the Rockies GM, who would also have to think hard and probably would ask for more

Centerfield Jan 31 2020 12:14 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

For real? This is crazy to me. No one is denying how good Arenado is. 5.7 bWAR last season. Terrific player. But he's also making $35M a year for the next 7 years, with a full no-trade and an opt out after 2021. It's not just an expensive contract, it's also one-sided. McNeil is not as good (5.0 bWAR). But he's dirt cheap and team-controlled all throughout his prime. Arenado and McNeil's contract situations are polar opposites. Even if you're just looking at 2020, it doesn't make sense. The question isn't whether Nolan Arenado is better than Jeff McNeil. The question is whether Nolan Arenado is better than Jeff McNeil and $35 million. (enough to buy, say, Anthony Rendon and his 6.3 bWAR). If the Mets had $35M to spend (and they don't so this is all a moot point) the dumbest thing they can do with it would be to trade McNeil for Arenado and give yourself a net bWAR of 0.7. The smart thing to do would have been to keep Rendon and sign McNeil and net yourself 6.3 bWAR. And now that Rendon and almost all other free agents are off the table, the smart thing to do with this $35M is to put it into your pocket and save it for the trade deadline, or even next year.

Centerfield Jan 31 2020 12:23 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Edgy MD wrote: One advantage that trading for a phat contract has over signing someone to one, is that you're only exposed to risk of catastrophe (David Wright's broken spine, for instance) for three or so years, vs. as opposed to seven or so. There are seven years left on the Arenado extension.

Johnny Lunchbucket Jan 31 2020 12:34 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

OK.... Arenado for Cespedes and Smith

LWFS Jan 31 2020 12:56 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Edgy MD wrote: One advantage that trading for a phat contract has over signing someone to one, is that you're only exposed to risk of catastrophe (David Wright's broken spine, for instance) for three or so years, vs. as opposed to seven or so. There are seven years left on the Arenado extension. There's also a player opt-out after 2021. So if things are going WELL, he's gone in two years. They're going to want more than we should give. We should not give that.

Edgy MD Jan 31 2020 01:47 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Edgy MD wrote: One advantage that trading for a phat contract has over signing someone to one, is that you're only exposed to risk of catastrophe (David Wright's broken spine, for instance) for three or so years, vs. as opposed to seven or so. There are seven years left on the Arenado extension. It's an advantage. It certainly shouldn't be the only consideration. And certainly not in this case.

Centerfield Feb 03 2020 08:20 AM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: OK.... Arenado for Cespedes and Smith Now this, I can get behind.

ashie62 Feb 03 2020 08:36 PM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

So, we get Arenado for a crapball?

41Forever Feb 04 2020 06:24 AM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: OK.... Arenado for Cespedes and Smith Now this, I can get behind. A healthy Cespedes would put up some huge numbers there. But his contract is so low now, and is in its last year, I think, that I don't know if there is much benefit in moving him. Now, if they would take Cano, I'd personally drive him to Denver.

HahnSolo Feb 04 2020 06:48 AM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: OK.... Arenado for Cespedes and Smith Now this, I can get behind. A healthy Cespedes would put up some huge numbers there. But his contract is so low now, and is in its last year, I think, that I don't know if there is much benefit in moving him. Now, if they would take Cano, I'd personally drive him to Denver. Isn't Arenado the benefit?

41Forever Feb 04 2020 06:51 AM Re: Should we be actually consider talking about Nolan Arenado?

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: OK.... Arenado for Cespedes and Smith Now this, I can get behind. A healthy Cespedes would put up some huge numbers there. But his contract is so low now, and is in its last year, I think, that I don't know if there is much benefit in moving him. Now, if they would take Cano, I'd personally drive him to Denver. Isn't Arenado the benefit? Realistically you'd think they'd need to take on a bad contract to help with the Mets taking on $35 million a year. Then again, if Arenado is going to use that opt out in a year, maybe they wouldn't have to.