As the Miami Marlins try to move Giancarlo Stanton, he seems intent on making it more difficult for them to do so.
The wisdom of giving anyone, even someone like Giancarlo Stanton, a 13-year, $325 million contract can be debated. But the Miami Marlins went against their own policy by allowing a full no-trade clause to be included in the deal, and now it’s biting them in a place it hurts.
Most of the recent trade rumors surrounding Stanton have involved the San Francisco Giants and St. Louis Cardinals, to the point of Stanton meeting with both teams and the framework of deals reportedly being worked on and agreed to. The Los Angeles Dodgers have also been lingering in the background.
It’s clear the Marlins want to shed significant payroll this offseason, and Thursday’s deal that sent Dee Gordon to the Seattle Mariners was the first step. But the big fish is obviously still Stanton, and he’s not making it easy on the Marlins’ new power structure.
The Stanton situation is still very fluid, and he holds the full no-trade clause card. But if he wants to win, as Craig Mish of Sirius XM suggests, the upcoming shedding of talent around him in Miami will make that a hard bargain if he ultimately stays there. Former Marlins president David Samson went on the Dan LeBatard Show this week with some pointed words about the Stanton situation.
“When we gave him a no-trade clause, it was something he required,” Samson said on “The Dan Le Batard Show” this week. “It’s a horrible clause to give to players. It is a big regret I have that I broke our rule and gave him a no-trade clause. It’s paralyzing. He is holding the team hostage because he can and it’s the power we gave him.”
Using a word like hostage is a little aggressive, but Stanton is essentially holding the Marlins hostage. At the very least, he’s creating a moving target in a flimsy effort to make a trade difficult. The Marlins can’t avoid all accountability or blame here, and his contract will naturally limit his market. But if Stanton wants to win somewhere in the next few years, his attempt at a hard-line stance with a no-trade clause in his pocket needs to change.