Trade for Shane McClanahan?

[Sour Masher]

He was just extended to $20 for four years, which I thought was bold given his lingering injury concerns. Maybe the guy who has him is having some regrets, or maybe he is caught up in the Detmers and Volpe hype, but he just offerred McClanahan for $5 Detmers, Volpe, and Ricky Tiedemann ($5 when I call them up). Normally, this is the sort of offer I make other teams--a package of hyped prospects and young players for an established elite keeper. But as much as I like McClanahan, and I'd love to get him back after trading him as a prospect, I'm concerned about how well he will hold up this year and beyond. Am I being overly cautious in not accepting this offer right away? Or do you share concerns about McClanahan on a four year contract?

Context: this is a 14 team mixed league with high inflation, as we start with $400 instead of $260, so a pitcher of Shane's caliber would go for $60+ in the auction. Of course, the inflation works both ways, and if Detmers, Volpe, and Tiedemann pan out, they would all be great values too.

[Sour Masher]

FWIW, the same guy also just extended Manoah to four years. I think Shane is the better pitcher when fully healthy, but I think Manoah is much safer health wise. I asked about him, but he also prefers Manoah for his durability, so it is Shane or no deal.

[fuhrdog]

No way do I want a pitcher extended for 4 years. Personal preferences but Detmer and Volpe would be too much for me.

[Sour Masher]

No way do I want a pitcher extended for 4 years. Personal preferences but Detmer and Volpe would be too much for me.

I get the sentiment, but the amount of inflation in my league makes the value of elite players such that it is really hard not to extend them. When a player would go for 70-80 in the auction, it pushes for even pitchers to get long extensions. Typically, elite bats get the max, which is 6 years for us. Ace-like pitchers generally get 4 years.

[Gregg]

I get the sentiment, but the amount of inflation in my league makes the value of elite players such that it is really hard not to extend them. When a player would go for 70-80 in the auction, it pushes for even pitchers to get long extensions. Typically, elite bats get the max, which is 6 years for us. Ace-like pitchers generally get 4 years.

Shane is only 25 years old. Pitching is always risky. $20 for a top pitcher is cheap. I would post the same question in here given the circumstances and then I would pull the trigger.

[Sharky]

That would be an awful deal for you. Pass.

[Sour Masher]

That would be an awful deal for you. Pass.

I am curious if you think it is lopsided because of the risk of a long term pitcher, especially one who throws as hard as McClanahan, who has already had issues, or if you think, injury risk aside, it is lopsided. I generally trade most of my prospects for established talent and while there have been spectacular regrets (trading Trout and Harper as prospects in the same deal to get Jimmy Rollins and Scott Baker comes to mind), overall, it has been a very successful approach for me, as most prospects do not live up to their potential. I do like Volpe a LOT, but McClanahan has proven to be capable of ace-like production, which makes him a much more sure commodity. For me, I am just struggling with trading so much for a guy I feel will inevitably be limited by injuries. On the other hand, Chris Sale was at a similar moment in his early career and he ended up having a great eight+ year run before he finally broke down.

[Sour Masher]

Update: he seems maybe possible open to swapping in David Peterson for Reid Detmers, which makes it much more tempting for me. I really like Detmers and don't think nearly as highly of Peterson, although I do think he will be solid. If I can get him to agree to Volpe, Peterson, and Tiedemann, should I do that?

[cool hand]

If I can get him to agree to Volpe, Peterson, and Tiedemann, should I do that?

I would

[Sharky]

I wouldn’t. It’s not about the pitcher, as I like McClanahan. I just feel the value your giving up in Volpe and Tiedemann is far too much.

[Gregg]

I wouldn’t. It’s not about the pitcher, as I like McClanahan. I just feel the value your giving up in Volpe and Tiedemann is far too much.

For this year or for future?

[The Feral Slasher]

For this year or for future?

Good question...if a healthy McClanahan likely makes you a strong favorite to win this year it may be worth it ....but also consider shopping Volpe to see what else is available. Keeping him is also a great option ....in summary fair trade...but without knowing l the league details it is hard to make a recommendation

[Ken]

I'd take the Shane Mac side

[Sour Masher]

Good question...if a healthy McClanahan likely makes you a strong favorite to win this year it may be worth it ....but also consider shopping Volpe to see what else is available. Keeping him is also a great option ....in summary fair trade...but without knowing l the league details it is hard to make a recommendation

I think I am a strong favorite to win this year right now regardless. I have what I think is a very strong team, but, of course, time will tell. Right out of the gate it would have been nice to have Shane's start today and my biggest auction get, Aaron Nola, did not do well. But it is a looong, glorious season.

[Sour Masher]

I'd take the Shane Mac side

We are still discussing, but Shane's start today, while not ending the talks, have put him in no hurry, since it is a weekly league and any deal would not lead to us having our new players until April 10. He may be the most easily moved by small sample size owner in the league and the most impatient, so a bad start today may have moved things quickly. I fear I will need Volpe to do well the next week or so to get this done now.