Would M's Trade Seager?

[NWinAZ]

This article is just speculation, but would M's even think about it due to $$$$$$?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Sox would love to put together a package to lure Kyle Seager from Seattle. But the 26-year-old has emerged as a foundational player for the Mariners, who will try to sign him to a contract extension now that he’s eligible for salary arbitration.
Other possible trade candidates might emerge, including the Indians’ Lonnie Chisenhall, the Cubs’ Luis Valbuena and the Pirates’ Pedro Alvarez.
​

Seager is coming off a good season with the Seattle Mariners, totaling a career high of 25 home runs and 96 RBI. Both of these numbers also led the team, which fell just short of the playoffs.
However, the 26-year-old player is going to start getting more expensive and could eventually price himself out of the Mariners' range. The Red Sox can make a good offer with young prospects and steal the quality player to make a big upgrade at an important position.

 

[Destroydacre]

Two words: Howard Lincoln.

 

[Msfann]

I'm sure they would trade him for a couple of nobody scrub bullpen arms, this team is allergic to success.

 

[NWinAZ]

Two words: Howard Lincoln.

That is the only reason why I even gave thought to this question. You know how the M's like to collect the kids because kids are the key to a successful franchise...blah, blah, blah. Kids are important part, but you also need more importantly MLB proven players.

But I could see them looking at a package of Middlebrooks, Betts, and Bogaerts for him. That would allow them to deal Miller and/or Taylor for a RF or 1B.

 

[cezero]

He could be an excellent trade piece for a competent GM.

 

[seahawksfan234]

The team needs more major league bats, not more prospects. We are built to win now, trading Seager would not help us achieve that goal.

 

[NWinAZ]

The team needs more major league bats, not more prospects. We are built to win now, trading Seager would not help us achieve that goal.

has that ever stopped the m's from doing the wrong thing before?

 

[cezero]

The team needs more major league bats, not more prospects. We are built to win now, trading Seager would not help us achieve that goal.

It's a balancing act for sure.

If Seager is good enough to make another AS team then great. I just don't think he's on that echelon. This team has massive deficiencies that need to be addressed. Selling high with Seager to address gaping woulds on the team is exactly what a great GM would try to do.

Free agent signings, trades, and farm building. A balance of those is absolutely necessary to built a real contender.

That's the only reason I wouldn't want Z to try it. He sucks at all of it outside of maybe farming pitching.

Catch 22 by definition.

 

[wazzu31]

If it weren't for Jack being the GM then I'd say yes to dealing Seager for a good package. And he would be the ideal guy in a Walker blockbuster deal instead of Paxton.

A. With most organizations there would be no question that Seager would be on the block. Their top offensive prospect is a 3B and instead of switching him positions they would deal the incumbent who has good trade value.

B. Assuming Kyle and Iwakuma get their value of deals then 60-70% of their payroll would be wrapped up in 4 guys.

 

[dude82]

For an offensively challenged team that has only produced one consistently good hitting prospect (Seager) in the last decade or so, I'm not for trading Seager without knowing what we have in Peterson at the major league level first. The M's simply don't have the luxury of trading a known quantity at the plate in the hopes that a promising prospect will pan out. If the M's had a better track record with hitting prospects, it'd be easier to let go of Seager, but the reality is that they don't and it's an awfully big risk to take when they don't have to.

 

[cezero]

The M's also don't have the luxury of zero rhb worth anything or an atrocious outfield. They're not little problems.

It's all a balancing act. I don't disagree with anybody opposed to trading Seager because no matter what, Z will mess it up. But something's got to give if this team is ever going to contend perennially.

Farming, free agents, and trades are the only way to fix them.

- As you said, we don't know if we have the fixes on the farm, and Z is terrible at that.

- If the M's front office keeps doing its thing, free agent solutions won't be an answer, and the market is pretty thin anyway.

-That leaves trades. Any good trade requires giving up quality to receive quality in return. Putting Seager out there is what any responsible club would do. I wouldn't want to trade him for prospects, which means he would have to be in a package with some of our pitching.

Like everybody else, I'm terrified of having Z trying to articulate a deal with a GM who knows what they're doing.

 

[gowazzu02]

God no, why would anyone want to trade one of our TWO competant major league bats? What woul dyou trade him for? More prosepects that will bust like Ackley, Smoak, Saunders, Reed, Miller, Moore, Johnson, Clement, Balentien, etc. etc. etc

NO

 

[cezero]

What woul dyou trade him for? More prosepects that will bust....

no, of course not. well, not me anyway.

combine seager with some of our pitching, and you have the ability to create some deals to acquire real MLB players to address offensive and defensive holes on this team.

it would be nice to just stockpile bats like clubs with great farm systems do, but since we only generate 1 or 2 per decade from our own farm, that's just not realistic.

trading talented players is always painful, but an absolute necessity for any team....especially one that can't build their own offense worth a shit or be counted on to purchase it from outside the organization.

we aren't the only team with a talented kid like seager who's about to be able to command big money. other teams will be looking to move similar players...including outfielders. giancarlo stanton is an extreme example, and it's silly to think we could ever get him, but you see good GM's trade equivalent positional non-prospect talent for what they need all the time. just not from the m's, really.

again, all of that said, we're talking JackZ, and it's pie in the sky to think he could articulate a trade package without getting completely raped.

 

[gowazzu02]

no, of course not. well, not me anyway.

combine seager with some of our pitching, and you have the ability to create some deals to acquire real MLB players to address offensive and defensive holes on this team.

it would be nice to just stockpile bats like clubs with great farm systems do, but since we only generate 1 or 2 per decade from our own farm, that's just not realistic.

trading talented players is always painful, but an absolute necessity for any team....especially one that can't build their own offense worth a shit or be counted on to purchase it from outside the organization.

again, all of that said, we're talking JackZ, and it's pie in the sky to think he could articulate a trade package without getting completely raped.

Its like robbing peter to pay paul though. Say you ytrade walker and seager for a pie in the sky thought of Stanton,,,, you have sured up your corner outfield, but you take away your all star third baseman........ Doesn't make sense.

 

[cezero]

Its like robbing peter to pay paul though. Say you ytrade walker and seager for a pie in the sky thought of Stanton,,,, you have sured up your corner outfield, but you take away your all star third baseman........ Doesn't make sense.

If that ever happened, not only would it "make sense" to me, it would be a fucking miracle. You wouldn't find a single sports writer on planet earth who would consider that anything but a huge win for the M's.

But yeah, a good Seager/pitcher/prospect package from us would have to yield at least 2 good MLB players in their arb years for the M's. That would require a multi-team deal, most likely. Again, the prospect of Z getting raped makes me not want to see it.