Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 54246
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:23 pm
Location: Greater St. Louis
x 290
x 3958

Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby Transmogrified Tiger » Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:02 pm



0 x

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 54246
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:23 pm
Location: Greater St. Louis
x 290
x 3958

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby Transmogrified Tiger » Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:06 pm

Neuse and Lazardo were both in the Nats Top 10 on MLB.com, FWIW. It seems like it might be comparable to something like Grimm + De La Cruz + Filiere(who can't be traded but if you want to match it up he's the closest I see)? If anything that probably undersells the return, but they did get both Doolittle and Madson so if you were curious about the cost for just Doolittle that might have been it.
1 x

User avatar
TomtheBombadil
All-Star
Posts: 4349
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 8:35 pm
x 162
x 258

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby TomtheBombadil » Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:11 pm

Image

Once again the Cubs pass on an interesting arm (Doolittle) with a cartoonish injury history. Keep it up!
0 x

davell
Hall of Fame
Posts: 20229
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 pm
x 1283
x 1732

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby davell » Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:21 pm

That's a pretty underwhelming return.
0 x
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

User avatar
Agony and Ivy
All-Star
Posts: 2056
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 8:10 pm
Location: Austin TX
x 908
x 490

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby Agony and Ivy » Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:32 pm

davell wrote:That's a pretty underwhelming return.


I'll bet that was more about Oakland getting out from under the $7.7m they owed Madson next season.
0 x

User avatar
The Logan
Superstar
Posts: 14400
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:03 am
Location: Lincoln Park
x 2972
x 990

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby The Logan » Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:37 pm

Good, now Doolittle's name can stop being brought up
0 x
Image

User avatar
Agony and Ivy
All-Star
Posts: 2056
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 8:10 pm
Location: Austin TX
x 908
x 490

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby Agony and Ivy » Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:39 pm

Agony and Ivy wrote:
davell wrote:That's a pretty underwhelming return.


I'll bet that was more about Oakland getting out from under the $7.7m they owed Madson next season.


But even so, those are two high upside prospects they got back.
0 x

CaliforniaRaisin
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 88436
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 2:20 pm
Location: Pasadena, CA
x 396
x 1657

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby CaliforniaRaisin » Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:47 pm

davell wrote:That's a pretty underwhelming return.


My first thought too.
0 x
Image

User avatar
Cubswin11
Superstar
Posts: 16930
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:17 pm
x 1940
x 1996

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby Cubswin11 » Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:52 pm

Their bullpen will still suck
0 x
Screw Pitchers

We Got The Whole 9
All-Star
Posts: 2338
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2016 2:38 am
x 256

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby We Got The Whole 9 » Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:14 pm

Probably equivalent to us giving up Rondon, Candy, Zagunis or something right? For 4 years of Dangling Shoulder and 2 of Madson, that's a hell of a trade for their pen.
0 x

User avatar
Regular Show
Starter
Posts: 360
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 10:16 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 579
x 76

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby Regular Show » Sun Jul 16, 2017 10:30 pm

CaliforniaRaisin wrote:
davell wrote:That's a pretty underwhelming return.


My first thought too.


I think this was a smart trade for Was, and not a great return for Oak also. Why didn't they wait till closer to the trade deadline? Were they that worried that Doolittle would get hurt again?

S. Doolittle, when healthy, is very good. Obviously, his injury concerns/history are big worries for any team acquiring him. Still, I like this trade for Was. Hopefully, their bullpen continues to suck because if they fix that problem -- they're pretty damn scary and formidable (manager notwithstanding).
0 x

User avatar
Little Slide Rooter
Formerly West Side Rooter
Posts: 26332
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:41 pm
Location: Here
x 175
Contact:

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby Little Slide Rooter » Mon Jul 17, 2017 12:18 am

I didn't realize how good Ryan Madson has been since his return from the dead.
0 x
We won the World Series.

Tryptamine
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 5639
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:13 pm
x 1
x 54

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby Tryptamine » Mon Jul 17, 2017 12:22 am

Regular Show wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:
davell wrote:That's a pretty underwhelming return.


My first thought too.


I think this was a smart trade for Was, and not a great return for Oak also. Why didn't they wait till closer to the trade deadline? Were they that worried that Doolittle would get hurt again?

S. Doolittle, when healthy, is very good. Obviously, his injury concerns/history are big worries for any team acquiring him. Still, I like this trade for Was. Hopefully, their bullpen continues to suck because if they fix that problem -- they're pretty damn scary and formidable (manager notwithstanding).


The man has had 2 nearly career ending shoulder injuries already. How much did people expect him to really fetch? He's a time bomb whose chances of going off before he reaches FA far exceeds the chances he makes it to FA healthy.
0 x

toonsterwu
All-Star
Posts: 4235
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:10 am
x 24

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby toonsterwu » Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:00 am

I like Neuse enough, so this trade seems fine to me. At the end of the day, it was a trade the Nats couldn't pass on. They need all the pen help they can get, and with Ross out, they have to shift options around. Giving up last year's 2nd and 3rd sucks, but is a livable price for them.

Don't think this rules out additional pen moves for them, namely, if Robertson's price comes down.
0 x

User avatar
CubInOK
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 6485
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 1:08 am
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
x 1027
x 315

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby CubInOK » Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:11 am

So Dusty Baker just got a pitcher that already has a history of injuries? This should go well.
0 x

Post Count Padder
Superstar
Posts: 14459
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 8:51 pm
Location: In your dreams
x 4
x 55

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby Post Count Padder » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:28 pm

Nats apparently still want Justin Wilson or another reliever on the market.
0 x
formerly known as PriorPower
formerly known as the guy with Huston Street in his sig

:flythew:

toonsterwu
All-Star
Posts: 4235
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:10 am
x 24

Re: Nats trade for Doolittle and Madson

Postby toonsterwu » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:54 pm

With Orioles selling, wouldn't be surprised if Nats went for someone like Brad Brach, if made available. Still, Brach should be in high demand. I had sorta wondered about Brach as a closer option this winter, but the Orioles were stupidly stubborn (could've moved Brach, moved Givens to setup, still had O'Day).

You know, for all the talk about this being an underwhelming return ... I just don't know why. Treinen was a solid reliever last year, a useful middle reliever if used correctly. Luzardo is an injury arm with high upside, and Neuse looks like he could be a Josh Harrison-esque guy, and while that doesn't sound like much, it's a useful major leaguer. The trade, like the Cubs trade, seems fair to me.
0 x


Return to “Transactions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Sammy Sofa and 2 guests