No.
That was the only way to start the article about the San Francisco Giants’ chances to sign Juan Soto, and it’s probably the only way to start one about them trading for Kyle Tucker, one of the best outfielders in baseball and someone the Astros might look to trade as he enters the final year of his contract. Joel Sherman of the New York Post is reporting that the Giants are involved, and Tucker would be a great fit. But, also, no. No, they’re not getting him, and you should be ashamed of yourself for entertaining the idea. I’ll need to take a shower after writing about it.
However, let’s pull back from the idea of Tucker, specifically. Let’s talk in general terms. If the Giants were to make a splashy trade for any big-name hitter, what would it look like?
It would probably be for a player who doesn’t have a lot of team control left. If there were an All-Star hitter still in his arbitration years, that would be great in theory, but every phone call would start with Bryce Eldridge, and it wouldn’t end there. For the right player under contract, you consider it. Except every other team would make those calls, too, and some of them have two or three prospects like that. Most of those teams would be willing to entertain the idea of trading them for a player under contract for another three years.
A player about to hit free agency, though, is different. Teams can have discussions about different trade packages, but it’s reasonable to have an untouchable player or prospect in that situation. That doesn’t mean that another team won’t cave and deal from their pool of untouchables, but it’s at least possible to keep a conversation going without feeling like anyone’s time is being wasted. The Giants could keep those kinds of calls going.
If the Giants were to find a fit with a team looking to deal a star player and pending free agent, it would be tough if that trade partner were rebuilding and looking for toolsy, low-level prospects with ultra-high ceilings. The Giants have a couple of prospects who might fit that description, but so do most teams. Most teams have even more. If the Giants really wanted to trade for Garrett Crochet, for example, they wouldn’t have been able to match the package from the Red Sox. The White Sox wouldn’t be interested in any trade that didn’t include Eldridge.
A team that’s still looking to win in the short term, though, would be different. The Giants have players in Triple A and on the fringes of the major-league roster. They have a former top-50 prospect in Marco Luciano that might benefit from a change of scenery. They have a gaggle of outfielders who could catch their trade partners’ fancy, like Luis Matos and Wade Meckler. They have a variety of arms that could interest a team that’s confident in its ability to develop pitchers, including Kyle Harrison, Hayden Birdsong and more. A team that’s looking to win now might consider a 101-mph high-leverage reliever under team control for a while.
Maybe the team would be without a first baseman and consider LaMonte Wade, Jr. as a reasonable addition to any trade package. Not a central piece to the deal, no, but there aren’t a lot of teams who can offer an instant .380 OBP at a position of need.
Maybe the team would be in danger of losing their long-term third baseman to free agency, and they would consider someone like Casey Schmitt as a viable alternative. Or, at the very least, maybe they’d consider him as a contingency plan if the rest of their offseason didn’t go according to plan.
Maybe a team looking to trade one year of a very good player would be willing to consider multiple years of a young, promising pitcher, along with multiple years of a young, promising position player not named “Eldridge,” if it also comes with immediate help at positions of need.
Now consider this hypothetical trade from the Giants’ perspective. Sometimes trading for a player as he’s entering his walk year is a feature, not a bug. It allows for exclusive negotiations throughout the year. That’s how the Dodgers were able to get Mookie Betts for the long term — they traded for him when his future was uncertain, and then they locked him up.
If this hypothetical player were a left-handed hitter, say, it would be even more beneficial for the Giants to see how he hits at Oracle Park before offering him $400 million. It’s one thing to hand out the biggest contract in franchise history to a right-handed hitter, but there would be more trepidation when it comes to a left-handed hitter. A try-before-you-buy arrangement wouldn’t just make sense for the team, either. It would be a way to convince the player, too, which is much harder to do in the abstract of the offseason. The flashiest PowerPoint presentations in the world aren’t going to stick with a left-handed star who’s worried about Oracle Park, but a year of evidence, along with a feel for the organization? That would go an awfully long way.
This hypothetical player, especially if he were left-handed, would need to be a well-rounded player who can thrive without hitting as many home runs as he did in a hitter-friendly park. There would have to be value in his defense, baserunning and on-base skills.
This hypothetical player would, OK, fine, we’re still talking about Kyle Tucker. It’s silly, except it’s not. It would be one thing if the Giants were trying to muscle their way into a deal with a team looking three seasons down the road, but the Astros? They’re looking for young, major-league pitchers right now. They’re still worried about who might get outs in the 11th inning of Game 7. They might trade one of their best relievers because he’s making too much money, and they would consider another high-leverage reliever making about $10 million less. They would consider the short-term value of a high-OBP first baseman because their internal options are that unpalatable, and they don’t want to pay players like Pete Alonso or Christian Walker.
No. But, I don’t know, maybe?
The Cubs are reportedly talking Seiya Suzuki and Isaac Parades, which seems like a much better idea for a win-now team like the Astros, but we don’t know if the Cubs are willing to trade both for a year of Kyle Tucker. Not really sure about anything the Cubs are doing, to be honest, considering they’re one of the biggest, richest teams but also looking to deal good players because of their high salaries.
It’s a long shot, and the Astros might hold on to Tucker anyway, on account of him being really good at baseball. They might trade him for a billion prospects five seconds after this is published, too. But it’s not impossible for the Giants to walk the tightrope of a trade package that helps a win-now team optimistic about their ability to win-now.
It’s a pipe dream, but sometimes things come out of those pipes, and you have to be ready to jump on them like an Italian plumber. Maybe you can crouch down and go into those pipes, where there are gold coins just waiting for you.
No, but perhaps. It’s not as outlandish and impossible as spending more money on a player than the Mets can offer. It’s just mostly outlandish and extremely difficult. But the best trades usually are. This is one the Giants should get creative with, if the Astros are willing to listen.
(Top photo of Tucker: Tim Warner / Getty Images)
