Rangers/Pirates Trade

[Deleted]

Rangers receive:
Masahiro Tanaka, SP ($15 in 2019)
Javier Baez, IF ($8.25, 6th yr)

Pirates receive:
Kyle Tucker, OF, Astros (minors)


Pirates cover all salary for Tanaka and Baez for 2019.

We chatted this type of deal for quite some time, glad we could finally pull it off Phil!

Merry Christmas everyone!

[Rangers GM (Phil)]

Accept. This one can really hurt if both guys end up one and done for my roster but I’m optimistic I can fit Baez into my future budget. Baez adds a tier of bat to my infield lineup that I’m lacking and Tanaka adds another strong arm to my rotation.

[Mariners GM (Beamer)]

Pass

[Deleted]

Approve

[Astros GM (Matt)]

wow nice move by Texas...approve

[Deleted]

Thats a lot of stuff to give up for just Tucker. Pretty borderline here for me.

[Orioles GM (Denver)]

Nope, gotta send it down.
Sorry

[Deleted]

Pass

[Deleted]

Nada, Baez is a top 10 bat and just because hes a 6 doesnt mean hes a rental

[Deleted]

Veto

[Deleted]

Veto, Baez alone is worth more than tucker

[Deleted]

Trade vetoed 4-4

no changes made.

[Deleted]

Can owners provide a little more justification on why this trade was vetoed? Baez is a 6, and Tanaka has one year left with a high salary. I'm starting a rebuild and neither guy will likely be a part of it. Tucker OTOH has 6 years remaining and is an absolute beast at the dish.

Also, both Baez and Tanaka have been OTB for some time, and this is by far the best return package I have received. I'd rather have one guy who is big-league ready, playing in a hitters haven, then scatter it amongst a ton of prospects who might not even get to the Show.

Thanks,
Dan

[Deleted]

Dec 30, 2018 13:28:00 GMT -6 @piratesgm said:

Can owners provide a little more justification on why this trade was vetoed? Baez is a 6, and Tanaka has one year left with a high salary. I'm starting a rebuild and neither guy will likely be a part of it. Tucker OTOH has 6 years remaining and is an absolute beast at the dish.

Also, both Baez and Tanaka have been OTB for some time, and this is by far the best return package I have received. I'd rather have one guy who is big-league ready, playing in a hitters haven, then scatter it amongst a ton of prospects who might not even get to the Show.

Thanks,
Dan

I think the main point of veto was we think you can get more along with Tucker. I do believe that Tucker is a "beast" at the dish as well but he hasn't shown much in MLB action. This is just my perception, maybe others found something else.

[Rangers GM (Phil)]

I will only add one thing to what Dan said:

Regarding Baez being a year 6 on the scale not being a rental, since this came up in the one veto explanation - no one suggested Baez is a rental. The fact is if Baez has a comparable year to 2018, he will be a very expensive RFA. The closest player resembling Baez in this year’s RFA was Arenado. He was signed for 5 years 41m per year pre-discounts. Baez could easily exceed that top bid on Arenado. I would only be able to take advantage of a 15% discount. So conservatively, Baez would cost me 35m per season at minimum (and likely would cost more) and I would be locked in to a 5 year commitment at that price. I believe the reduced primary RFA discount (20% to 10%) was not factored in by teams in evaluating this trade. I don’t pretend to know what the Pirates GM plans are but if he wanted to reacquire Baez he could easily bid up Baez in RFA such that I would be unable to or foolish to keep Baez given my other future cap commitments. Many teams other than Pirates could do the same in bidding up Baez. I would surely not get a return as great as Kyle Tucker in any sign and trade. No, Baez is not a rental but if he is a top 10 bat again this year, he damn well sure will cost the moon and stars in RFA.