Red Sox: 2017 offseason BSI round table discussion

PHOENIX, AZ - SEPTEMBER 24: Giancarlo Stanton
PHOENIX, AZ - SEPTEMBER 24: Giancarlo Stanton /
2 of 6
PHOENIX, AZ – SEPTEMBER 24: Giancarlo Stanton (Photo by Christian Petersen/Getty Images)
PHOENIX, AZ – SEPTEMBER 24: Giancarlo Stanton (Photo by Christian Petersen/Getty Images) /

What assets would you be willing to offer the Miami Marlins for Giancarlo Stanton, assuming the Red Sox would take on his entire contract?

Sean Penney: Not as much as you might think. I outlined this in more detail last week, but the gist of it is that Miami needs to dump Stanton’s salary as desperately as Boston needs his power bat. No team is going to give up their best assets in order to take on the $295 million still owed on that contract. Most teams can’t afford the long-term risk, while Stanton’s no-trade clause shrinks the shallow pool of suitors further. A young, cost-controlled talent like Jackie Bradley or Eduardo Rodriguez could headline the deal, along with a few mid-tier prospects. If Miami wants all prospects in return then a package can be assembled around just about anyone other than Jay Groome or Michael Chavis.

Rick McNair: That contract is a burden and to assume it means a “hometown” discount in talent sent to Miami. I would offer them any three of our top ten prospects since our farm system looks like a wheat field after a locust swarm has hit. As far as MLB talent the only two I would part with if prospects were not the answer is Jackie Bradley or Xander Bogaerts. Both will probably be looking at $100 Million soon. Let that be Miami’s problem.

Josh Greenberg: While there are few players I’d like to see in a Red Sox uniform more than Stanton, I simply wouldn’t be willing to offer the assets I know it would take to get him. While I could name a variety of players I’d give up for him, none of them would be the players the Marlins would be looking for. I’m certain Miami would ask for at least two of Mookie Betts, Andrew Benintendi, and Rafael Devers, and possibly all three. While the Red Sox need an impact bat, losing those three would be a bitter pill to swallow. If Stanton struggled at all, riots would break out across Boston. Giving up that much talent for one player, even one as spectacular as Stanton, just isn’t a good idea. Were I in Dave Dombrowski’s shoes, I’d simply look elsewhere for a new power bat and continue to admire Stanton from afar.

Jake Sauberman: Almost nothing. Of course this answer largely depends on how much money the Red Sox would be taking back, but that answer is almost definitely “a whole lot”. The Marlins’ main reason for dealing Stanton is to clear salary, not necessarily acquire elite young talent. So I would give pretty much nothing of value for Stanton when there is an equal hitter (J.D. Martinez) available on the market for only dollars.

Bryson Gordon:  First of all, I would like to mention that I am 100% pro-Stanton. The Red Sox have a power shortage, and there is no better way to help that than getting the best home run hitter in baseball. If the Red Sox are taking on all of the contract, they should start the bidding with one, and only one of these three: Jackie Bradley Jr, Xander Bogaerts, and Eduardo Rodriguez. After that, they should be willing to offer one high level prospect, maybe Michael Chavis or Jason Groome. Then to finish the deal, adding in one mid-level prospect should do the trick. But if the Red Sox are taking the full contract, there is no scenario where they should offer Devers, Benintendi, or Betts.