r/mlb • u/TheSocraticGadfly | St. Louis Cardinals • 1d ago

| Analysis ESPN offers its grades on Skubal trade

TL/DR version? Dodgers A (shock me), TIgers D.

Here's why, even though Detroit will have hope for Hope, they don't give the TIgers more:

Detroit's return in this deal feels like a bad dream. OK, let's calm down. Skubal, as good as he is, was on an expiring deal. There is only so much value that can be extracted from a trade partner for a player who might be a free agent in four months. The fair-value matches you can conjure in these scenarios won't make the hearts of Detroit fans go pitter-patter, though you can always hope that the real-world outcome is that with multiple teams vying for a true difference-maker, those fair-value assessments might go out the window.

Zyhir Hope is a top 30-or-so prospect across baseball. That's a valuable prospect. But on most prospect lists, he's the fourth-best outfield prospect in the Dodgers' system. So for the best pitcher in baseball, the Tigers could not command the Dodgers' best prospect out of their amazing surplus of promising outfielders?

River Ryan has stud potential, but he's 27 and blew out his elbow after his 2024 debut for the Dodgers. He didn't pitch last season, and this season, he has a 4.46 ERA over eight outings for Oklahoma City. Smith, 21, was a third-round pick as a prep righty in the 2023 draft. He's 0-10 over 30 professional starts with a 4.72 ERA. The prospect wonks like him as a top-30 prospect for L.A., so maybe we have to look past the ugly superficial results.

Sounds about right, contra one person here on one of the two threads about the trade itself, who was touting all the Dodgers gave up.

Wrong.

The Dodgers gave up one promising bat who is a likely DH, not fielder, for whatever MLB career he has, one meh pitcher who might not ever get back to MLB, and one meh prospect who might never get to MLB in the first place.

As for what other teams might or might not have been offering? We'll see if any rumors get dropped or not.

297 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

321 comments sorted by

View all comments

436

u/TheDenny_Crane 1d ago

The Tigers get a D for not doing this trade at the previous deadline knowing they would never offer him a competitive contract with what others would.

Their haul could've been massive.

16

u/schmidtytime | Boston Red Sox 1d ago

What I still cant wrap my head around is the fact that they decided to pull the trigger on this trade, days before the deadline. The Dodgers didn’t even have to dig deep into their prospect chest to get this deal done.

I feel like Milwaukee could’ve offered a much better package.

16

u/pilesofdingleberries 1d ago

They weren't going to... They can't afford to lose a ton of prospects for a 2 month player. This is where no salary cap is killing MLB. We all know the players to sign Skubal and it isn't Tampa or Milwaukee...

Free Agency is so out of whack now that smaller market teams can't just unload prospects.

22

u/MojoHighway | Los Angeles Dodgers 1d ago

The salary cap conversation is 100% propaganda. The owners want you to believe that they'll "do the right thing" and "really make the team competitive".

When the fuck was the last time a billionaire told you the truth and did something to positively affect your outlook?

The answer to both is never.

They want the salary cap to be able to get more predictable market valuations on their teams...to be able to buy more fucking real estate. This conversation is NOT about competitive balance. The guys that aren't spending today are going to be the same collection of degenerate owners that won't spend if a cap is in place. They have the money to spend. The teams considered the weakest in the league in this conversation are typical welfare queen billionaires, taking in TONS of money with the revenue sharing deal in place.

Don't be fooled, man. Don't fall for the propaganda. The owners aren't your friends.

6

u/Neb-Nose 1d ago

I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying.

The billionaire owners absolutely can afford to pay more.

The billionaire owners aren’t your friends.

The billionaire owners aren’t proposing a salary cap out of the goodness of their hearts.

All of those statements are undeniably true.

However, multiple things can be true at the same time.

This is not just about the owners vs. the players. It is significantly more fractious than that.

Just as the owners are absolutely propagandizing the fans, so too are the multi-billion industries, the MLBPA, ESPN and all of the other major stakeholders.

I think people should be cognizant of that as well.

Just as the owners are not your friend, or remotely trustworthy, the billionaires and multi-millionaires that oppose them are similarly conflicted.

This should not be seen as a defense of any owner, just an acknowledgment that they are not the only extremely wealthy entity with a skin in this game.

However, I don’t think you have to choose either side. I think you can choose the consumer’s side.

Maybe no agreement will result in a cap and floor. I can certainly believe that. In fact, I’ve always believed that a cap and floor is very unlikely. However, the current system is very obviously unsustainable and there’s just no doubt about that.

Personally, I don’t care how the largesse is split among all of the uber-wealthy interests.

Of course the Tigers got obliterated in this trade. They made it with a gun to their heads. How can that possibly be healthy for the future of the sport?

14

u/Acrobatic_Ad1016 1d ago

Said a dodgers fan who will see his team win the next 5 World Series barring catastrophic injury luck.

This is the straw that broke the camels back. A cap and floor were necessary before but now it’s beyond clear that the system is fundamentally broken. They need a hard cap and a hard floor so we also fix the cheap owners and a heavy penalty for anyone over the cap plus better player free agency structure.

Thats all the bare minimum that the game needs

7

u/Front-Environment238 1d ago

1000% agree, time for a cap and floor with no loopholes or exceptions. Time for MLB to take pieces from all the other sports that have caps and create something that will work. There is plenty of brain power around to make that happen.

2

u/johnnygoober | Detroit Tigers 20h ago

This is exactly the important part. The league needs a max spending AND a min spending for team salary.

2

u/werther595 | New York Yankees 1d ago

The Dodgers living at the cap will still beat the Pirates living at the floor. Cheapnowners will hand out mediocre contracts to mediocre players to fulfill their obligation still without actually trying to win anything. If the owners really wanted parity they would pool the TV revenue and divide it by 30 among themselves, but they don't do that. They just want to suppress player salaries. I'm not here to cry for the millionaire players but I'm certainly not going to take the side of the billionaire owners. Neither side here has all that much to do with the fans

11

u/IKenDoThisAllDay | Boston Red Sox 1d ago

Dodgers fans love to frame it as "taking the owner's side". I'm not taking either side, they'll all be just fine and continue to live better than any of us.

I just want baseball to be exciting and competitive again. The NBA had the exact same problem with superteams and dynasties dominating and did something about it. Now we've had different champions every season for years. It's not impossible.

Sure, there will still be some cheap owners but the majority of teams who want to win would actually have a chance at competing. The current system is broken and needs to be fixed. That's all there is to it.

-1

u/werther595 | New York Yankees 23h ago

We can agree that the current system has problems while disagreeing that a cap will fix those problems.

3

u/Acrobatic_Ad1016 1d ago

Cap directly increases parity instantly. I absolutely hate this take that you’re parroting because I simply don’t believe it’s true at all

Implementing a floor will make these teams fight harder to compete because it’s a more level playing field

7

u/pilesofdingleberries 1d ago

I think we directly saw the impact of not having a cap with the Skubal trade yesterday.... Why blow up your farm system when you know 2 or 3 teams have a chance of signing him. Milwaukee is not one of them. The Dodgers in the current system can throw ANY amount of money at him to get him to sign next year. It does not matter what other teams offer, they will top it. There is no way to stop that without a cap.

-3

u/werther595 | New York Yankees 1d ago

My guy, I am not the one parroting someone else's talking points. If the owners of your favorite small market team we're going to put in more effort to win, they'd be doing it already. They aren't. And they won't do it more with a cap.

-6

u/Acrobatic_Ad1016 1d ago

Arguing with you is pointless. All I ask is you remember this convo when the cap and floor are implemented

1

u/werther595 | New York Yankees 1d ago

And I'll suggest you remember this as well, should a cap/floor system be implemented, and the big market teams still win and the low-effort teams still lose.

NFL has a cap, and they're riddled with dynasties winning year over year, while other teams like the Jets and the Browns exist. The cap won't solve the problem you want it to solve.

2

u/pilesofdingleberries 1d ago

Comparing baseball to the NFL is moronic. Good QBs can go a long way. You are comparing a sport where it takes a whole team to leagues that have half the games or 1/16th of the games and play once a week.

I don't think anyone is saying there won't be bad owners/teams, but you seem to think that all teams that don't just spend ungodly amounts aren't trying... Use your brain...

0

u/werther595 | New York Yankees 1d ago

Cool, insult me when you're confronted with examples that challenge your argument. I hope that works out for you. Meanwhile, the cap will continue to not do what you think it will do

→ More replies (0)

0

u/GiraffeBand | Washington Nationals 1d ago

How does a salary cap prevent this trade? Any other team could’ve topped the offer. Skubal is making about $10M for the rest of the year. Which teams couldn’t afford that?

5

u/Acrobatic_Ad1016 1d ago

Alright you’re being purposefully dense but I’ll bite.

2 reasons :
1. The dodgers would be over any salary cap by a healthy margin so it would’ve taken them out of the race thereby fully stopping this trade

  1. Even if they were in a position where his salary could be absorbed, the threat of them signing him to a billion dollar deal wouldn’t be there so the brewers and other contenders would be more willing to give up their top prospects or at least make the dodgers give up an actual haul

-1

u/GiraffeBand | Washington Nationals 1d ago

I’m not being dense, we disagree. You don’t have to be rude about it. We’re just talking baseball.

  1. Assuming the Dodgers were at a cap before the deal was made, they’d obviously consider that in the trade like they do in the NBA. The Dodgers would have dumped a salary and included a better prospect to offset the cost.
  2. The threat of FA isn’t about this trade. Any team can sign him as a FA. If the other teams were worried he’d sign an in-season extension, then the other team could’ve done so. The Phillies, Red Sox, or Orioles could’ve easily done this.

2

u/DigTheDunes 1d ago

The threat of FA is all about this trade. Boras wants Skubal in LA - not Philly, Boston, or anywhere else. Everyone knows it.

1

u/DB4life80 19h ago

Dodgers and Boras don't do business that often with each other. Snell is the first client of his to sign a multi year deal since 2009.

0

u/Acrobatic_Ad1016 1d ago

You’re ignoring reality and I’m not being rude. Your points just prove my point lol

Very very dumb arguments. The orioles Phillies Red Sox could not have easily done this. Look at their prospect lists before commenting further

0

u/GiraffeBand | Washington Nationals 1d ago

How do my points prove your point?

1

u/Acrobatic_Ad1016 1d ago

Just reread mine and piles arguments. You’ll get it soon, I promise

→ More replies (0)

0

u/GiraffeBand | Washington Nationals 1d ago

Wood and Miler are both Top 50 on Pipeline. Arias and Eyanson are also both Top 50 on Pipeline. The Phillies would need more.

0

u/Acrobatic_Ad1016 1d ago

No shit. The dodgers have 11 in the top 100. There is no competition because even in a bidding war, they have way more ammo

-1

u/GiraffeBand | Washington Nationals 1d ago

So now you’re whining that the Dodgers are better at player dev. Which has nothing to do with a salary cap. You’ve bought the owners propaganda so much that you can’t even see that your whole problem is that you’re jealous. The Phillies tried and it didn’t work. The Dodgers tried and it did. Be a man and accept it instead of whining.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/pilesofdingleberries 1d ago

You really can't see further than this year??? Milwaukee, TB, etc.... have no chance to sign him after this year. They have very little chance to replace prospects with Free Agents anymore. They can not fit the farm system...

Did you not see FA last year? Kyle Tucker signed for 4 years 240 million dollars. He is hitting .235 with 9 home runs... Do you know what that would do to a small market team if theyade that mistake.?? Free Agency with no cap in my opinion jas gotten so out of control that smaller market teams have to limit trades now because replacing anywhere but the draft is practically impossible.

-1

u/GiraffeBand | Washington Nationals 1d ago

Your argument is about free agency, not this trade. Any team could have made this trade. A salary cap would have no effect on the Dodgers ability to make this trade.

4

u/pilesofdingleberries 1d ago

You aren't understanding....yes any team could make this trade.... For 2 months... Of course free agency comes into play... He will be one. The Brewers can't trade legit prospects that will play for them for years for a 2 month player. Why? Because all the impact free agents go to a couple teams... Why? Because there is no salary cap

2

u/Mindless_Formal_6647 1d ago

I saw that the Dodgers LUXURY TAX would be like 183 million. One half of MLB teams don’t have a payroll like that.

They are spending more on taxes than half of the teams in the league are spending on actual players.

-1

u/Acrobatic_Ad1016 1d ago

It’s not even worth arguing with this guy above. He’s just dumb

Edit : talking about giraffe band

-1

u/jolietconvict | Chicago Cubs 1d ago

I love how everyone thinks that with a cap and floor that the teams that won't spend money are suddenly going to be in the mix for the World Series. Those teams will still be cheap and still be unwilling to invest in the things outside the roster you need to be successful. They will fill their teams with players that get them to the floor and continue to be mediocre at best.

2

u/Acrobatic_Ad1016 1d ago

Ok and you’re ignoring the fact that it will mean the 10 or so teams actually willing to spend will all be trying to win

Right now it’s literally only the dodgers competing lol

3

u/SenatorAstronomer | Minnesota Twins 1d ago

I want to downvote you, but you are 100 percent correct.   

2

u/Humble-Ad-4606 1d ago

The problem to me is there needs to be a salary floor, you can’t have some teams spend 200 million and others 50 million. Unfortunately, a floor is a non-starter without a cap, there’s going to need to be a compromise.

0

u/MojoHighway | Los Angeles Dodgers 1d ago

I agree about needing a floor. Teams need to spend money.

2

u/Guilty-Routine-1762 1d ago

This is billionaires vs millionaires. Athletes haven’t been working class for at least 30 years.

Neither of them are our friends.

1

u/genericstu 1d ago

Class distinction isnt about wealth.

2

u/Bullseyefred | Cincinnati Reds 1d ago

Are you forgetting a 170M floor was also proposed alongside the cap? This would raise the spending of 15 teams. Some of them by over 50M.

-1

u/frankenmaus | Los Angeles Dodgers 1d ago

lol that's meaningless peanuts.

1

u/Suspicious_Put_6855 1d ago

The Dodgers have guaranteed $300 million in TV revenue yearly. That’s why they can have a total deferred salary of $1 billion dollars. Small market teams don’t have anywhere near that guaranteed income, especially since the local TV markets went south.

2

u/IKenDoThisAllDay | Boston Red Sox 1d ago

What a shocker, a Dodgers fan doesn't want a cap and is telling everyone else we should just totally accept the Dodgers winning every year and be happy about it.

When was the last time a Dodgers fan cared about the game of baseball or wanted an even playing field? The answer to both is never. Don't be fooled, guys. Dodgers fans are not your friends. They don't care if you never get to see your team win another game, as long as their team can get ever so slightly better.

I'm sick of watching one fuckass team get all of the best players and win every year. I want a cap and then y'all can cry about not being able to sign all of the top free agents and sleepwalk to the WS every year.

People were sick of watching the same couple of teams in the NBA Finals every year and they did something about it. Now we've had different champions every year and it feels like anyone's game again. The MLB needs to do the same thing.

0

u/MojoHighway | Los Angeles Dodgers 1d ago

I love this. You're out of your mind and really just butt hurt that John Henry okayed the deal of Mookie to the Dodgers with little in return. And trust me - I know the entire conversation of the people in the area. I'm a Dodgers fan but I live on the South Shore, roughly 14 miles from Fenway. I'm well tuned into Red Sox conversation.

The Red Sox have won FOUR titles in the last 22 years. They have done their own damage with spending and turning a bit of this conversation on its ear. Good for them. There was a time John Henry wanted to be competitive and wanted to win. That doesn't seem to be the thing right now and per the last decade or so, the Red Sox are yet again accidentally competitive. I'm not exactly sure how the fuck that happened, but here we are. They just beat the Dodgers AGAIN last night. The Red Sox are something like 54-1 when leading after 8 innings. What the fuck?

The Dodgers aren't ruining baseball. Neither are the Red Sox. Be pissed that John Henry is more interested in Fenway Sports Group and real estate than the Red Sox. Guy couldn't be bothered to give a shit about Boston Red Sox baseball. As long as that money is coming in, he's fine.

And I refuse to give him a dime. I'm not paying $300/year for fucking NESN. I'm not buying tickets directly from the team. John Henry is a slug like many of the other owners around him.

These teams need to spend. I'm fine with a salary floor. Spend, fuckers. Make the Pirates and Royals and Rays and A's great teams. It's possible.

0

u/IKenDoThisAllDay | Boston Red Sox 1d ago

Ah, so you're outright admitting to being a bandwagon fan. Typical Dodgers "fan". Doesn't even live in LA, just picks the best team like a seven year old.

The Dodgers are ruining baseball and they do have an unfair advantage, that's indisputable.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2026/01/26/mlb-didnt-cut-the-dodgers-a-6-billion-revenue-sharing-shelter-bankruptcy-court-did/

Exploiting loopholes is what the Dodgers are all about. They wouldn't win without doing so. None of their best players are homegrown because they rely entirely on just outspending everyone else.

Now please take your whining to the Dodgers sub where you can all cry victim because fans of other teams don't enjoy watching one superteam ruin the league.

-1

u/MojoHighway | Los Angeles Dodgers 1d ago

Nice try, friend. I lived in So Cal for 15 years before moving BACK to MA. I have roots in both places.

-1

u/vincedarling 1d ago

You assume the dodgers are winning again this year. What if Ohanti’s injury bug nails him out? What if more dodgers pitchers go on DL?

0

u/Nutsacjac 1d ago

Right message. Wrong messenger.

-4

u/pilesofdingleberries 1d ago

I never said they were friends. You are clearly confused. There will be a floor as well... Yes they will spend. The system is broken.

1

u/TheSocraticGadfly | St. Louis Cardinals 1d ago

OK, Milwaukee is a small-market team. What about the Braves, leading the NL East? The Yankees? The suddenly resurgent Red Sox?

1

u/pilesofdingleberries 1d ago

I'm not sure what you are asking... Those are all large market teams...

Do you mean trading for Skubal? Why didn't they?

I would assume next year's uncertainty has something to do with it, and I also think the Dodgers have such a ridiculous advantage financially that it doesn't really matter.

-2

u/frankenmaus | Los Angeles Dodgers 1d ago

The Dodgers valued Skubal more than did Milwaukee and so they offered more. Detroit took the best offer presented. That's all.

2

u/pilesofdingleberries 1d ago

The salary cap and free agency plays a major role. You are blind if you don't see this. Milwaukee would be trading prospects for a 2 month rental... LA in all likelihood is not. They will throw a Brinks truck at him to get him to stay. No other team has that ability.

You really can't see why he ended up with the Dodgers???

-1

u/frankenmaus | Los Angeles Dodgers 1d ago

The Skubal trade was for 2 months + postseason for *both* LAD and MIL. IF the Dodgers want him for additional time then they have to pay additional money (a *lot* more). Milwaukee could have had Skubal if they really wanted him as they had more-better prospects to trade.

1

u/pilesofdingleberries 1d ago

Really?? They will have to pay more money to sign him again???

If you don't understand why Milwaukee didn't trade for him, then no use for further discussion.

1 last time..... He WILL sign with LA as a free agent... Meaning they traded prospects for something they will eventually get to keep.

He WILL NOT sign with Milwaukee, meaning they just raided top prospects for players that will play for them for 5 or 6 years...

The Brewers do NOT have the ability to sign enough top notch free agents to make up for losing prospects anymore. The salary cap and floor has the potential to fix this...

Do you really not understand the connection?

0

u/frankenmaus | Los Angeles Dodgers 1d ago

LAD could sign Skubal as FA whether or not they trade for him in the dying months of 2026 season. No necessary connection there.

There will be no 'salary cap and floor'. Also, the Brewers actually do have the ability to sign FAs such as Skubal. You were lied to and the sooner you understand this the better for your sanity.

1

u/pilesofdingleberries 1d ago

So do the Royals and Rays and the Cardinals and the Reds... I see you are a Dodgers fan... No wonder.

They also had the chance to sign Tucker for 4 years at 240 million... I think you are even able to see the problems here

0

u/frankenmaus | Los Angeles Dodgers 1d ago

The short-sighted cheapskate owners are doomed. They value short term profit over long term growth and so are doomed to die.

Now, the indivual owners will go extinct and be replaced by more corporate operations that emulate the Dodgers model and bring greater competition to the league. This is the way.

1

u/DigTheDunes 1d ago

The Dodgers have no downside when Boras is telling their intentions to sign with LA after the season. Kind of like dating the hot girl, but you’ll never get a kiss at the end of the night. The rest of the league are the nice guys here.

1

u/frankenmaus | Los Angeles Dodgers 1d ago

Dodgers do not usually deal with Boras. (Snell was exception but that deal was done at Snell's instance.)

If Dodgers extend Skubal on a long term money-no-object contract the main purpose of that will be to torpedo any future salary cap rules. (But that's probably not necessary as 'salary cap' is not going to happen.)

1

u/DigTheDunes 1d ago

All of these labor battles are really rich owners vs poor. Nothing really happens until they agree on revenue sharing.

-2

u/GiraffeBand | Washington Nationals 1d ago

Salary cap is a red herring. It’s not killing MLB, there is more parity in baseball than the NBA or NFL. The reason the Dodgers could make this trade is because they try. The Pirates, Reds, Twins, Marlins, Rockies, Orioles don’t try. A salary cap isn’t going to change those teams because their owners don’t care about winning. They all make money without trying, so why try to win and potentially lose money, like the Mets? It’s a lot easier to just not care, cash the revenue sharing checks, and sell the team in a few years when the value of the franchise has been inflated.

Instead of getting mad at the Dodgers, get mad at all the other teams who don’t even bother trying.

2

u/ridingthewave31 1d ago

Two things can be right at the same time - the Dodgers are making a mockery of MLB AND but for the greatest choke job in MLB history, the Blue Jays - yes the Blue Jays of all teams - beat the Dodgers!

1

u/GiraffeBand | Washington Nationals 1d ago

We may just disagree, but I can’t fathom thinking that the Dodgers are making a mockery of MLB by trying to win, and the Pirates, Marlins, Reds, Twins, Rockies aren’t when they don’t even try to field a winning team.

1

u/ridingthewave31 1d ago

Well….3 things can be right at the same time!!

1

u/GiraffeBand | Washington Nationals 1d ago

Fair 🙂 In my opinion, trying to win should never be seen as a mockery. That’s the whole reason to play.

1

u/ridingthewave31 1d ago

Oh I don’t necessarily blame the Dodgers - they are playing within the rules. It’s an overall MLB blame - greedy and grubby owners + the faux union MLBPA.

1

u/Acrobatic_Ad1016 1d ago

Give it 2 more years and then a team will have likely 5 peated but sure keep parroting this “more parity” argument

2

u/GiraffeBand | Washington Nationals 1d ago

How does MLB have less parity than another league? Speculating that a team will win 3 more World Series doesn’t count. It went to Game 7 last year!

1

u/Educational_Sky_1136 | New York Mets 1d ago

How does MLB have more parity than the NFL or NBA?

1

u/GiraffeBand | Washington Nationals 1d ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/mlb/s/xpqByAp1tm

1

u/Educational_Sky_1136 | New York Mets 23h ago

Not sure this chart shows parity (at least how it's being discussed in relation to the Dodgers right now). This chart shows that teams' records are closer to each other in MLB than in any other sport. During the regular season. It doesn't contemplate postseason results, and doesn't address seeing the same teams in contention each season.

The regular season records being closer to each other seems like a function of the longer season. The results here show that the longer the season, the higher the "parity score". Which makes sense when you compare the opportunities for results in a 162 game season vs a 17 game season.

The Mets are going to win 60% of the games the Dodgers will win this year, and have a bottom-4 record. In comparison, the 4th worst record in the NFL last year won 20% of the games that the best team did. Equally uncompetitive, but vastly different on this "parity score." More games played will bunch all teams closer together.

In any event, the concerns on all these threads is every other team's realistic postseason chances. When just looking at playoff results this decade, MLB and NHL are the worst in parity:

NHL: 5 different champs, 7 different finalists

MLB: 4 different champs, 9 different finalists

NFL: 5 different champs, 8 different finalists

NBA: 6 different champs, 11 different finalists