Where to go from here?
by Bigfan16 on Jun 3, 2008 9:54 AM CDT
97 comments
First let me state than I am pleased with this season so far and hope the Rangers continue to re-build the team along the current lines. The real question is what do the Rangers do to get some excitement going forward other than go on a 12 game winning streak. I say get active in the trade market right now.
The Rangers have once again struggled with pitching of late and I question if that was inevitable considering Millwood and the enigmatic Padilla were the only givens going into spring training. Bmac may also be in this group but has yet to start for a full season. Re-treads like Ponson and Jennings are what they are and thank God for Ponson so far. I am firmly in the camp of the game is about the pitching.
Names and teams mentioned recently looking to trade that interest me include the Giants (Linecum, Cain and now Threets), Royals (Greinke) and Bosox are looking for a bat to replace Ortiz.
Start the conversations with the Giants and see what they need for Threets who is out of options and DFA. While you are talking feel them out for the price for Linecum or Cain both of whicjh I believe would demand a handsome price in prospects. Threets coud be a nice LH option behind CJ and Eddie giving Wash a few more options and could come cheap considering the circumstances. Probably looking at a low level prospect at most here for Threets and see if he can stick.
Call the Royals and inquire about Greinke then compare the price with the Giants demands for Linecum or Cain.
Now for the painful part. Shop Bradley (whom I think is great for this team) to Bosox to replace Ortiz in their line-up. Selling on Bradley now IMO is selling high and the Bosox may be in a position to pay a premium for his bat. Though considering the Gagne deal the Bosox may not take your call :). Try to match what you can get for Bradley to the requirements from either the Giants or Royals.
Pull a package from the farm (Davis) and what you get for Bradley and acquire one of the SP mentioned above.
You have taken a flier on Bradley and his history this past off-season and turned it into a young starting pitcher. Added a power LHP with a big upside to the pen and postioned this team better going into the off season.
For arguements sake say we are able to get Greinke and Threets for Bradley, Davis and a low level prospect.
Starting the off season with Millwood, Padilla, Greinke and BMac to start the rotation would put the Rangers in a unique (for the Rangers) position of rotational strength. They could afford a FA signing, or even package a couple of pitchers for another SP who may need a change of scenery. Or just pencil in one of the 12 SP into the 5th spot who will have started a game for the Rangers this season. Personally I would like to see the Rangers money whip Sheets or Sabathia to join the above and form a stout rotation for several years to come.
0 recs |
97 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Did I miss something
Why would Boston be looking to replace Ortiz? Is he injured and gonna be out for awhile or something?
by bigsteve on Jun 3, 2008 10:09 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
torn ECU tendon
on the dl now. out at least a month. more information coming today.
they are hoping a month and francona says surgery is unlikely, but it is something that can result in season ending surgery if its worse than they think or something goes badly.
Gerald Laird is my hero.
by DSheppard on Jun 3, 2008 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Boston should wait to make a deal
Stuff I read on the BoSox website, considerations for them:
First, they don’t know if he needs surgery or not yet. Second, they have 9 NL park games in June where they won’t need the DH. Third, they can DH Manny and put Crisp and/or call up Moss to play in the OF.
In short, they have the depth to cope in the short term. If he needs surgery or looks to be out for a couple of months, then maybe they’re interested in Bradley. Put Crisp in CF and move Hamilton to right? (of course, I’m asking for Crisp plus a B prospect in exchange for Bradley).
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Jun 3, 2008 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have liked Crisp in the past
but he’s struggling this year and wasn’t very good offensively last year either.
He is an outstanding CF but I’d keep Bradley.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Jun 3, 2008 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This offense might be able to carry Crisp
and the defense would begreat, but I’m not as high on him as I would have been a year ago.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Jun 3, 2008 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
crisp is top 15 in all star voting
beast.
Gerald Laird is my hero.
by DSheppard on Jun 3, 2008 10:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
although seriously...
no I wouldnt do that.
if bradley goes it needs to be for pitching. crisp would be a luxury and I dont even know if Id want to kick boggs/byrd out of the rotation for him, the defense is good as is. certainly not a big enough upgrade to lose a big trading chip for in my opinion.
Gerald Laird is my hero.
by DSheppard on Jun 3, 2008 10:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey Tball long time...
I am fine with Crisp plus a prospect for Bradley. Would you think the Crisp, Davis or MaxRam and the prospect would fetch Greinke from the Royals or Linecum from the Giants???
by Bigfan16 on Jun 3, 2008 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would the Giants trade Lincecum, exactly?
by jamcadbury on Jun 3, 2008 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
no way he moves. zip zero nada.
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Jun 3, 2008 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe we can get Zito
I keed, I keed
"No, Donny, these men are nihilists, there's nothing to be afraid of."
by Walter Sobchak on Jun 4, 2008 1:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Royals and the Gigantes
are both pretty set in CF with Dejesus and Rowand, respectively. Doubt a package headlined by Crisp does much for either GM.
The 40 trumps all!!!
by thedirkatron on Jun 3, 2008 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bradley
You don’t think he’d command more than Crisp and a B prospect?
I don’t think you need bidding to get more than that…
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Jun 3, 2008 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, the more I think about that
the less I like my own idea. Bradley should bring back near-ready pitching of quality, and I doubt the Red Sox would give up one of their hot young arms.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Jun 3, 2008 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes you could get more.
My point in trading Bradley would be to flip the return to another team for a SP. What would Royals want for Greinke or the Giants want for Cain or Linecum. They may value Crisp more than we would but their point of view is what counts. I am not saying I want Crisp on the Rangers, in fact I do not. I want a SP of quality and do not see Bradley fitting into the Royals or Giants plans right now.
by Bigfan16 on Jun 3, 2008 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
See zywica's post below
The Giants trading either of those pitchers right now would be like the Rangers trading Hamilton. The Giants don’t have anything going for them right now except those guys, they’re not going anywhere. As for Greinke, he might be available, but at a ridiculous price. KC would probably want a ton of young talent in return.
No, you need to find a team that wants to win right now, and is willing to mortgage the future to do so. Not a team in the same boat as the Rangers.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Jun 3, 2008 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree
2 teams in the same boat can make a trade. Neither the Rangers nor the Reds mortgaged their future by making the trade this summer.
by corbsclinton on Jun 3, 2008 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
totally different
Both were teams who traded out of a position of depth for a position of need. We needed an outfielder and we had pitching. They needed a young pitcher and had extra outfielders
by bigsteve on Jun 3, 2008 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what planet do you live on?
“we had pitching”, “position of depth” ??? We gave them our best high ceiling MLB pitcher for their best high ceiling OF prospect. We sure as hell weren’t dealing from a position of depth. If we trade a middle infielder, a catcher, and a high-ceiling A or AA righty then we would be dealing from depth
by corbsclinton on Jun 3, 2008 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You could argue
that this past offseason the Rangers did indeed have more pitching depth than outfielders. CF was a huge hole for the Rangers, and it was anyone’s guess as to whether or not Volquez would be more valuable this season than Gabbard. And even then the Rangers resisted giving up Volquez for a month.
Part of my point here is: Even if KC was willing to deal Greinke (a big if in my opinion), the price would be quite painful. And the Rangers are not a good match, since KC would likely want guys close to being ready and the Rangers best prospects are lower in the system.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Jun 3, 2008 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
pitching
When that trade was made we had a rotation of Millwood, Padilla, McCarthy, Gabbard, Jennings. We had Hurley, Galarraga, Mendoza, Mathis and Harrison in the upper minors along with the plethora of guys in the lower minors. So yeah we had pitching depth and Volquez was an unknown. You damn sure didn’t know he was going to play the way he has this year. Cincy had Hamilton Griffey, Dunn, Freel, and their stud prospect Bruce coming up.
by bigsteve on Jun 3, 2008 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That rotation wasn't great
before the season started…as I stated in a reply to you at the time…and it certainly isn’t now.
Isn’t it clear now that we not only don’t and didn’t have pitching depth…we barely have effective pitching?
Hitting makes peoples eyes glaze over.
I don't know Karate...but I know Karazy!
by Clueless on Jun 3, 2008 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobodys saying it was great
But it was deep.
by bigsteve on Jun 3, 2008 7:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
thats one trade that worked out for both sides
when was the last time a trade worked so well?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Jun 3, 2008 2:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Arizona...Max Scherzer?
fit there?
"No, Donny, these men are nihilists, there's nothing to be afraid of."
by Walter Sobchak on Jun 4, 2008 1:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We will not get anywhere near that much for Bradley
Given his contract status, his injury history, his volatile nature, and his likelihood of regression.
by Telegraph on Jun 3, 2008 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what'd the A's get for him when they sent him to San Diego?
??
"No, Donny, these men are nihilists, there's nothing to be afraid of."
by Walter Sobchak on Jun 4, 2008 1:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Andrew Brown
He’s in the bigs this year putting up pretty good stats as a reliever.
White Women!
by nikpin on Jun 4, 2008 9:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Same injury as
Nomar in 2002 (who only played 21 games that year).
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Jun 3, 2008 10:16 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the obvious move
is for JD to get on the phone and call Miles, Juan Dominguez’s agent, for an extra bullpen arm.
Sharky said it, I believe it, that settles it
by DJCahill on Jun 3, 2008 10:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I need to
do a Juan Dominguez update post, some interesting things have happened.
"No bear or disco for Juan" - Mr. Santos
by miles on Jun 3, 2008 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We are all
on tenterhooks, anxiously awaiting.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Jun 3, 2008 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you want to be an agent or TV producer
Pick one now.
by Telegraph on Jun 3, 2008 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A fighter...
I want to show Kimbo Slice who’s boss.
"No bear or disco for Juan" - Mr. Santos
by miles on Jun 3, 2008 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Talk about guys like Lincecum, Cain and Greinke
is a complete waste of time. Do you guys realize that Lincecum is, like, the best pitcher in baseball? Why in the world would the Giants trade him? He’s the one thing (along with Cain) that they have going for them as a franchise. It makes absolutely no sense.
You guys are going to give us a bad reputation.
by Brett Perryman on Jun 3, 2008 10:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
thats the point
the Giants have nothing going for them except 2 guys, so what if we give them Salty, Davis, and a Madrigal, Davis and Salty could produce right now. Madrigal isnt far behind!
by blueballlefty on Jun 3, 2008 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
are you SERIOUS
salty/davis/madrigal?
if they traded him (and they wouldnt) im sure it would be something like salty/andrus/davis+++
were talking about MORE than we got for teix here
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Jun 3, 2008 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
how
is salty/andrus/davis more than we got for tex, salty and andrus where in that deal and I would definately trade Davis for Harrison/Feliz/B.Jones right now so no it wouldnt be more it would be less and I would have traded Tex for Lincecum
by blueballlefty on Jun 3, 2008 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you missed the
+ he put after salty/andrus/davis.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Jun 3, 2008 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
do you think cain really belongs on that level?
He has racked up some service time and has been good but dominant in a major pitchers park. 4.38 this year. 4.35 career on the road.
Hes one of the two things they have going for them now, but I meant.. wouldnt salty (as part of a package) then be one of those good things?
although i guess bengie molina is one of their only producing players right now. but still, in general concept…
Gerald Laird is my hero.
by DSheppard on Jun 3, 2008 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cain
threw nearly 400 innings of very good pitching at ages 21 and 22 the last two years. Yeah, he belongs on that level. If he was a Ranger he might be the 2nd best player on the team. Jesus, he’s just 23. If this is a rough patch, I’d love to be weathering it with him as a Ranger.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Jun 3, 2008 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well im not trying to offer tejeda for him or something.
Gerald Laird is my hero.
by DSheppard on Jun 3, 2008 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's not Lincecum
so at least it’s conceivable on some level. I’d be pretty surprised if he were available to be moved, and I think that discussing him is a waste of time too, but at least it’s not as ridiculous as trying to think up a way to get Lincecum at a reasonable price.
by Brett Perryman on Jun 3, 2008 12:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What about Grienke?
While I agree the idea of getting Lincecum for what is being talked about here is tantamount to the Cleveland fan’s laughable trade proposal for Hambone someone published a while back, but what about the Grink?
If Rosenthal is right and KC decides they have too many holes to fill on this club and that dealing Grink is the best way to do it, what would it take? Salty, Davis/Andrus and a B pitching prospect (Poveda? Madrigal? Harrison?)? I have to think that’d get us close, no?
The 40 trumps all!!!
by thedirkatron on Jun 3, 2008 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
First off
I think that either they are wrong to think that or he is wrong to report it. But anyway, the only problem I see there is that KC needs pitching more than the rest of their positions filled. I can’t see them lopping their best pitcher off the top and not expecting to get a really excellent pitching prospect back. I could see them doing a deal where they get a great pitching prospect along with a hitter or two, not three positional prospects. But that’s just me.
by Brett Perryman on Jun 3, 2008 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I don’t see them trading a young pitcher like Grink, especially with all they’ve been through getting him back to major league form.
But, hey, it was reported by Rosenthal… though that still means next to nothing.
Would you do Hurley/Salty/Davis for Grinky?
The 40 trumps all!!!
by thedirkatron on Jun 3, 2008 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Investment
If I were a Royals fan I would hate for them to ship Greinke somewhere else after all that. He’s their Hamilton on an emotional level, been to hell and back and now succeeding. I understand it’s a business and no one is truly untouchable, but If I were in charge there I’d think long and hard about trading him even if the return was awesome.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Jun 3, 2008 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
seriously?
Grienke still seems like a bit of a wild card for me. This team needs to learn how to evaluate pitchers before they become the most expensive thing on the market. Trading for them at peak value is idiocy left to the likes of the Mets.
by clark on Jun 3, 2008 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Greinke
is probably still a bit of a wild card, but in the same way that Hamilton is. His on-field package is excellent. great fastball, strong secondary stuff, great command. He is pretty special if he can hold together okay. And I’m not sure what the Mets comparison is. Santana is a completely different situation. Besides, if you are just going on talent, that was a fantastic deal for them.
Also, I would LOVE for the Rangers to improve their ability to recognize pitchers in advance. That’s kind of the whole problem with the organization for the last 35 years. But since they still can’t, I guess you just sit and stew about it? You gotta get pitching somehow, and all three of those players have MAJOR questions about them, much bigger than Greinke.
by Brett Perryman on Jun 3, 2008 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i guess i am just not ready
for this team to make that kind of move. i don’t know if adding Greinke to this team makes much of a difference over the next couple of years, especially if it costs us those three players.
with the mets, i agree that they got great value in the Santana deal, but then, they got the best pitcher in baseball. i should not have name dropped them, as that is an old stigma that remains from the phillips days.
by clark on Jun 3, 2008 5:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Frankly
I don’t know that those three are going to make a huge marginal contribution over the next couple of years. And while Greinke is just one pitcher, he slides the rest of them down a slot (suddenly guys like Millwood and Padilla are the middle of your roto, not the front, and McCarthy could become a big asset at the back) and makes a big impact on the pen and all of that.
You’re giving up a lot of talent, but that would make a bigger difference than anything else.
by Brett Perryman on Jun 3, 2008 7:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Frankly,
it is going to take a while for me to ever get behind a trade when we are considered “buyers”. I just don’t trust JD in that situation. His track record of judging his own talent is abysmal. He could throw darts at his org depth chart, trade those players, and have them turn into legit players.
by clark on Jun 3, 2008 11:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lincecum
He was apparently available over the winter (http://rowlandsoffice.typepad.com/weblog/2007/11/lincecum-availa.html) according to Rigolsby. That rumor might not be true, but it was at least out there.
I think the Giants would have to listen to a reasonable offer for him that would stock them at multiple positions. There is no point in having an ace when your team is abysmal at basically every position.
Salty, Andrus, 1 of Boggs/Duran/Murphy/JMJ, Hurley, 2 of Beaven/Main/Font/Castillo/Kiker/Feliz/etc. should make them interested, I would think. It’s a better deal than the A’s got for Haren (and justifiably so).
There is one other possibility that might arouse the owner in addition to prospects: offer to take Zito’s contract (or a big chunk of it).
--Brian
by BCanfield on Jun 3, 2008 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am pretty sure that
it wasn’t true.
by Brett Perryman on Jun 3, 2008 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'm with Z
pretend that the SF Giants are Lincecum’s mom and base any offers around the assumption that Lincecum’s mom isn’t open to trading away her son.
Josh Hamilton straight up wouldn’t even get it done…wouldn’t even come close in fact.
Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball
by willamos2 on Jun 3, 2008 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hamilton
Well, I would hope that Hamilton straight up wouldn’t get it done. Neither Lincecum nor Hamilton can make that team competitive in the next 5 years. The Giants need to blow-up the team and start over. Lincecum will be a free agent before the Giants are able to put a competitive team on the field. They need a head start on rebuilding, and to do that, they need to deal Lincecum and Cain for the best offers they can get. Otherwise, they will be stuck in mediocracy longer than the Rangers have been.
--Brian
by BCanfield on Jun 3, 2008 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Abso-friggin-lutely.
SF is in such trouble that Cain and Lincecum will be $10MM pitchers before they’re ready to compete for anything. They have next to no offense. If they want to maximize their contributions to the organization, the best option is to trade them – Billy Beane style.
by NoNameOnCard on Jun 3, 2008 11:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
While I'm not as adamently against
speculative threads as Z, I’d like to see links that actually says so and so is available.
by FirebatM3 on Jun 3, 2008 11:16 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I have no problem with speculative threads
but speculation based on acquiring Tim freaking Lincecum is nonsensical. At least think it through a little, suggest a trade for someone who you might have some glimmer of hope in some alternative universe of aqcuiring. This stuff is like George Costanza telling Steinbrenner that he’s figured out a way to get Bonds and Griffey without giving up much.
by Brett Perryman on Jun 3, 2008 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You sure
we couldn’t get lincecum for say, Botts, Arias, and Meyer?
Sharky said it, I believe it, that settles it
by DJCahill on Jun 3, 2008 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lincecum and Cain!!!!
"No bear or disco for Juan" - Mr. Santos
by miles on Jun 3, 2008 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We might have to throw in
Nate Gold to get Cain.
Sharky said it, I believe it, that settles it
by DJCahill on Jun 3, 2008 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
haha
This stuff is like George Costanza telling Steinbrenner that he’s figured out a way to get Bonds and Griffey without giving up much.
I always wanted to hear George’s plan. If only he had become Assistant GM….
Joe Morgan: (On Jay Bruce) I think he will. He brings energy to the team, and besides that, he is a pretty good hitter.
Ken Tremendous: I like that the #1 reason he will help his team is: "energy," and the distant #2 reason is: "ability to hit baseballs."
by TheBZA on Jun 3, 2008 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
As I said above
I think people need to stop looking for trade partners in teams that are in rebuild mode like the Rangers. Why on earth would SF or KC give up young talent? They’re not in win now mode. We should be speculating about teams with a real shot this year and an obvious need of someone like Bradley, Padilla, etc.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Jun 3, 2008 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
there are times
when deals of young talent between rebuilding teams do occur (see: Rangers-Reds – Hamilton for Volquez), but I’d like to see soemthing that says they’re actually available.
A guy like Greinke, I can maybe see if Dayton Moore believes he’s about to fall off the non-crazy horse again, but I doubt it. A deal I might be able to see is something like Brian Bannister for Gerald Laird. Exchange of mid-level talent.
by FirebatM3 on Jun 3, 2008 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So look for a team that is a win now mode and
go after more prospects. That has been the plan for the past 12 to 18 months and the farm is loaded with young talent acquired through trades and the draft. I would like to augment that base with the additon of a quality SP. Z’s point on Linecum is accurate but Greinke has been rumored to be available for the right price. Bradley does fit what the Royals are looking for, probably young ready or close to ready players. We could package what we have in the farm day say MaxRam, Salty, Elvis and a pitching prospect. My thought is use the situation in Boston and turn Bradley into the types of prospects KC may be looking for, add in one or two of our guys (don’t empty the cupboard) and essentially trade Bradley for a quality SP who already in the bigs and under control for a couple of years.
As for keeping Bradley and gaining draft picks next year…not a bad plan but we have already added a bunch of talent into the rookie and low-A level that we could afford to look for a SP who can help solidify the rotation for 2,3-4 years until the young kids develop.
by Bigfan16 on Jun 3, 2008 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bradley
y’all need to remember anything we trade Bradley for needs to be worth MORE than 2 FIRST round picks, as it looks right now we would get a 1 and conp. 1 for Bradley if we keep him and let him leave during free agency. So I do like Crisp and a top B prospect for Bradley if we are just talking players, but if Bradley keeps playing even remotely close to this level we could get a large haul in next years draft.
by blueballlefty on Jun 3, 2008 11:24 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
any AA to AAA
player who appears to have a significantly good chance to be an everyday major league player (not a star) is probably worth more than 2 first round draft picks.
Sharky said it, I believe it, that settles it
by DJCahill on Jun 3, 2008 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
especially since
“2 first round picks” means one supplemental pick and either a late one or very possibly a lower round pick. It’s not like you’re piling up top five picks. You’re getting, like, Kasey Kiker and Tommy Hunter range guys, best case (in terms of where the picks occur).
by Brett Perryman on Jun 3, 2008 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I should have clarified that
since the best pick you can get is 16, I believe. You are definitely not getting sure things with the first and supp picks.
Sharky said it, I believe it, that settles it
by DJCahill on Jun 3, 2008 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well shit...
I’d take another Blake Beavan and Michael Main for Bradley…
"No, Donny, these men are nihilists, there's nothing to be afraid of."
by Walter Sobchak on Jun 4, 2008 1:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We might even get
a Chad Hawkins, Tyrell Godwin, or David Mead if we are lucky.
Sharky said it, I believe it, that settles it
by DJCahill on Jun 4, 2008 7:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what about offering Bradley to Tampa Bay to
replace Hinske or Cliff Floyd?
I’d be interested in Matt Garza realistically…although I think TB would be reluctant to give him up since they gave up Delmon Young for him. It would probably take quite a bit more than just Bradley.
Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball
by willamos2 on Jun 3, 2008 12:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I have mentioned Bradley to Tampa before
But I am skeptical for two reasons. Cliff Floyd has looked good so far and can really only play DH at this point. And I am not sure how much of their young talent they will trade away. The key is to find players who are “blocked”. Look at the trades from last year. Salty was behind McCann, Andrus behind Escobar, Murphy and Gabbard were no better than 3rd or 4th options. Then add in some very young wild cards, boom or bust types. That seems to be the formula.
Tampa Bay has amazing pitching depth. They have a solid big league rotation right now, and they have Davis, McGee, and Price in the minors. If Bradley can play OF, I would offer him to TB for Jeremy Hellickson, who is a slight notch below their big three, and then ask for Desmond Jennings, a very toolsy young OF. They get possibly the best hitter on the market without giving up their top guys (along with two comp picks), but we get two players almost sure to be on every top 100 prospect list next year.
by clark on Jun 3, 2008 1:23 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
interesting
I would only disagree in the sense that I don’t think Floyd has looked “good”. Sure, he hasn’t fallen on his face, but Bradley is playing like an All-Star – not a replacement level player.
You mention some good “ingredients” with regards to blocked players. That is a good idea, but I think you could also look at the players that are blocking them. In 2 years, the TB rotation will (they hope) have some 5-some of Shields, Kazmir, Garza, Price, Davis, and McGee. I would think that they would be willing to sacrifice one of them if they got a piece that could help them continue winning in the short-term, create some more buzz in the area, and possibly help them win this year.
Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball
by willamos2 on Jun 3, 2008 1:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
RE: blocked players
For example, the Rangers are probably willing to trade Laird, Salty, Teagarden, or Max Ramirez. You don’t just have to grab the guy at the lowest-level.
Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball
by willamos2 on Jun 3, 2008 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You do
when that team is in contention, because teams do not want to affect their current player mix. I love Garza as a pitcher, but there is no way they trade a key member of their current starting rotation, because there is no guarantee that one of the three prospects can come in and replicate his numbers right away.
by clark on Jun 3, 2008 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
so...go for Price
"No, Donny, these men are nihilists, there's nothing to be afraid of."
by Walter Sobchak on Jun 4, 2008 1:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hellickson
FWIW, here is a great scouting report on him:
http://www.saberscouting.com/2008/05/23/jeremyhellicksonreport/#more-201
Again, I think he and Jennings are a very realistic package for Bradley.
by clark on Jun 3, 2008 2:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Desmond Jennings?
I can’t see getting both of those guys for Bradley.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Jun 3, 2008 2:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jennings might be doubtful
because he has been injured most of the year, and after trading Young they don’t have the OF depth they used to. Realistically we end up with Mitch Talbot instead. But Jennings is who i would ask for.
by clark on Jun 3, 2008 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
in fact
now that I say that, I really like that deal. Talbot could step into the rotation tomorrow if we traded for him, and it would allow us to not rush a guy like Harrison. I could live with Hurley and Talbot at the back end of our rotation for the last few months of this season.
by clark on Jun 3, 2008 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I kind of doubt that we could even get Hellickson
He is very highly regarded.
by Brett Perryman on Jun 3, 2008 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Vero Beach
has a way of making pitchers look great. Both Davis and McGee have come back down to earth this year at AA (still very solid, but no more Nintendo numbers). The profile makes Hellickson sound like a future #3 starter, if all goes well. Talbot is probably more of a #4. That seems like a fair return for a guy with the second best OPS in the AL. And all of the positive attributes he brought to the Rangers (veteran leadership, strong desire to win, patience at the plate) are things that Tampa could really use as well.
by clark on Jun 3, 2008 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that it's reasonable
to think of Hellickson as a future #3. But Vero Beach by no means gave him his reputation. He was a lot of people’s breakout candidate before this season, based more on what he’d already done. He dominated A- and A the last two years.
I’ll put it this way, if we could do a deal with Bradley that included Hellickson, I’d do it. He has a lot going for him, and he has much more of a feel for pitching than McGee and Davis.
by Brett Perryman on Jun 3, 2008 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i didn't check the stats on Vero Beach
sometimes i am lazy. But still, if you trade one of, if not the best hitters on the market, I would hope you can get at least a guy like Hellickson. Talbot is pretty intriguing as well, because he has seen his stock fluctuate quite a bit. Over his last nine starts in AAA, he has been stellar.
by clark on Jun 3, 2008 4:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How many pitching prospects do you think
are better than Hellickson? When you say you would expect to at least get a guy like him, what level are you assuming that they should receive? A top 100 overall prospect? Top 25 pitcher? One of the top 10-15 pitching prospects in baseball?
by Brett Perryman on Jun 3, 2008 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe Hellickson
is too sexy of a name right now. he wasn’t on any top 100 lists that i saw before this year. this is all theoretical, of course, but i would ask tampa for one of davis, mcgee, and hellickson, along with Talbot. if they feel that hellickson has surpassed the other two, that’s fine. i like all three.
a lot can change, and it all depends on whether guys like Bay and Holliday end up on the market. but bradley has an OPS over 1.000 right now. he is an impact, middle of the order type hitter. he will almost certainly draw two draft picks at the end of the year. i think he has some very legit value. this is not gagne, part two.
by clark on Jun 3, 2008 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My thoughts on this
Trade: Jarrod Saltalamacchia to the Red Sox for Michael Bowden and IF Yamicha Navarro
Trade: Ian Kinsler (going to get flamed) and Scott Feldman to the Royals for Zack Greinke and Devon Lowery
Trade: Hank Blalock and a B-level prospect to Cleveland for Adam Miller. Miller isn’t any less injury prone than Blalock, but it helps both sides, Blalock has hit well when healthy. He could help Cleveland at third base. Miller is out at least 8 weeks I think, i’ve heard he’s out for the year but I think that was the original time table and it was put down.
Re-sign Milton Bradley to a 2 year,$18 million deal with an option for a third year
Lineup:
C- Teagarden/Ramirez
1B- Davis
2B- Young
3B- Metcalf/Vazquez/trade
SS- Arias/stop gap until Andrus is ready
LF- Murphy
CF- Hamilton
RF- Mayberry/Boggs
DH- Bradley/Ramirez
rotation:
1. Greinke
2. Bowden
3. Hurley
4. McCarthy
5. Padilla/Millwood until Harrison is ready
by FutureGM914 on Jun 3, 2008 11:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I love trade proposals
I think Salty is worth more than Bowden and Navarro. Navarro is young, but he is also in the Sally league, and his numbers won’t blow any minds. With Andrus and Lemon, he doesn’t seem like would have much value for this franchise. I like Bowden a lot, but Salty is one of the premier young catchers in the league. I ask for Bowden, and at least a B prospect like Kalish or Bard. Masterson is the guy i really like, though.
Not sure about the Greinke trade. It makes our IF pretty weak across the board for at least a couple of years. And i would think it will take more to acquire Greinke. Injured players typically don’t get traded. I would rather let Blalock come back and try to rebuild his value, and then see what happens.
by clark on Jun 4, 2008 12:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
nah...I probably sound ridiculous, but it's fun to try:
Trade: Duran, Blalock and Hurley to the Twins for Liriano
Trade: Laird, Padilla and Benoit to the D-Backs for Max Scherzer
Trade: Ponson for a very decent prospect
Sign: Oliver Perez
Lineup:
1. SS Andrus
2. 2B Kinsler
3. 3B Young
4. RF Hamilton
5. LF Bradley
6. 1B Chris Davis
7. C Saltalamacchia/Teagarden
8. DH Max-Ram/Mayberry
9. CF Boggs
IF utility: Arias/Vazquez, 4th outfielder: Murphy or even Borbon; Mayberry backs up 1B and OF
rotation:
1. Liriano
2. Millwood
3. Perez
3. McCarthy
5. Scherzer
Bullpen: CJ closing, Frankie Fran setting up, Warner Madrigal, Kea Kometani, Thomas Diamond, Tommy Hunter, Josh Rupe with Harrison, AJ Murray, etc. waiting in the wings; once Millwood is gone, Neftali Feliz, Kasey Kiker, Mike Main or Blake Beavan waiting to take over…
"No, Donny, these men are nihilists, there's nothing to be afraid of."
by Walter Sobchak on Jun 4, 2008 1:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
