Trade Revisited

[Milkman delivers]

Let's get Carlos Lee back and have him play LF. He's doing great today. He also leads the NL in RBI's and hit 2 HR's today already.

 

He was also hitting against the God-awful Colorado Rockies. That team may be worse than the Royals. They are really bad.

[Jabroni]

The Mets won't trade Wright. He is young, cheap, and good. Why would they ever want to get rid of him?

[Fotop]

Blalock could be had for the right price, Tex was a 3b coming up too, and the Rangers system is stocked with hitting prospects.

 

For the right SP, the Rangers probably will entertain all offers.

 

Sb

 

Teixiera = Boras client, so the Sox probably wouldn't be looking at him in a trade w/the Rangers. Blalock makes a world of sense. Cheap (for now), left handed, plays a good 3rd base. In my mind he wouldn't have the immediate impact Chavez would, but I would much rather work a trade for Blalock than Chavez. The financial burden is much less, Blalock isn't much worse than Chavez, and maybe just maybe we'd be able to get Blalock without dealng McCarthy. The only problem is would Texas really deal a guy like Blalock while still in contention? I don't know, but if we could give them something like Crede, Tracey, Diaz or some sort of combination like that I'd be ecstatic.

[Soxbadger]

The only reason the Mets would trade Wright is if they were getting some sort of great deal and were completely blown away. Lets say the A's offer Chavez, Harden for Wright and Floyd. The Mets may take that deal eventhough Wright is a monster, just because the other pieces would vastly improve their team.

 

Once again I only said Wright because some one was listing the best 3b, and left him off of the list. I just was stating that Wright should be on the list of good hitting 3b.

 

As for would Texas trade Blalock, it just depends on what they are getting and what they want. If the White Sox mention McCarthy, I have to believe Texas would listen. For a variety of lower calibre players, they may also be willing to work out a deal if we are giving them some SP who can produce this year or next year.

 

SB

[JUGGERNAUT]

The Blaylock vs Chavez debate is interesting. On the one hand you have the contending Ranger & on the other you have the floundering A's.

 

By all accounts from what we've seen & heard of BMac he is likely to rank in the top 20 in his first year in the AL. That's better than anything Garland or Contreras has ever done. Good enough to qualify as a solid #2.

 

So trading BMac at this stage is like trading a #2/#3 starter in the AL.

Texas is going to pay a higher price to get him than the A's because they need him this year.

 

Ozzie just flat out blew it when pulling BMac for Vizc. Vizc had the numbers against Ramirez but he totally blows at Wrigley (16.20ERA in 04,

7.71ERA in 03). You don't pitch Vizc at Wrigley. That decision cost BMac the win & a solid era.

 

Is Blalock worth a #2/#3 starter? No. You are trading what is likely a top 20 pitcher for a 30th ranked hitter. A consistent 30 rank but still only 30th.

So if I'm trading for Blalock using Crede I'm using someone other than BMac.

 

Is Chavez worth a #2/#3 starter? No. His 2004 year looks like a fluke.

He was ranked 10th, prior to that his RPG rankings resemble that of Koney. Somewhere between a 25-30 ranking. Better than Blaylock but not by much. Currently he ranks 91st (worse than Crede). He's sure to come out of it but that's likely going to have him finish between 25-30.

So what we have here is a player who has ranked 25-30 for 4 of the last 5 yrs & top 10 1 yr. That yr looks like a fluke.

 

Trading Crede for either of these guys is a good idea but it should come at a cheaper price than BMac. I liken this to the Cubs trading Zamby for these guys after his first start. That would be crazy as well.

 

BMac represents insurance against injury for El Duque. El Duque has already gone on the DL once. The odds are he'll be there again. It's unlikely the CHW will avoid running up a yr of service on BMac. I would not use BMac in this trade. If anybody it should be Contreras. 14M/2yr.

The Sox can fork over the cash they got from NYY if need be. That's not a

bad price for either the A's or the Rangers for the 11th ranked Contreras.

His value has never been higher.

 

Trading Contreras high for Chavez low should net a high prospect as well.

Crede has ranked 66th, & 71st in the past two yrs. So either guy would be a substantial upgrade.

 

Win share wise:

Blaylock/Chavez + BMac > Crede+Contreras

That's why you use Contreras instead. BMac gives you more flexibility payroll for the future as well.

[RockRaines]

The Blaylock vs Chavez debate is interesting.  On the one hand you have the contending Ranger & on the other you have the floundering A's. 

 

By all accounts from what we've seen & heard of BMac he is likely to rank in the top 20 in his first year in the AL.  That's better than anything Garland or Contreras has ever done.  Good enough to qualify as a solid #2.

 

So trading BMac at this stage is like trading a #2/#3 starter in the AL.

Texas is going to pay a higher price to get him than the A's because they need him this year.

 

Ozzie just flat out blew it when pulling BMac for Vizc.  Vizc had the numbers against Ramirez but he totally blows at Wrigley (16.20ERA in 04,

7.71ERA in 03).  You don't pitch Vizc at Wrigley.  That decision cost BMac the win & a solid era. 

 

Is Blalock worth a #2/#3 starter?  No.  You are trading what is likely a top 20 pitcher for a 30th ranked hitter.  A consistent 30 rank but still only 30th.

So if I'm trading for Blalock using Crede I'm using someone other than BMac. 

 

Is Chavez worth a #2/#3 starter? No.  His 2004 year looks like a fluke.

He was ranked 10th, prior to that his RPG rankings resemble that of Koney.  Somewhere between a 25-30 ranking.  Better than Blaylock but not by much.  Currently he ranks 91st (worse than Crede).  He's sure to come out of it but that's likely going to have him finish between 25-30.

So what we have here is a player who has ranked 25-30 for 4 of the last 5 yrs & top 10 1 yr.  That yr looks like a fluke.

 

Trading Crede for either of these guys is a good idea but it should come at a cheaper price than BMac.  I liken this to the Cubs trading Zamby for these guys after his first start.  That would be crazy as well.

 

BMac represents insurance against injury for El Duque.  El Duque has already gone on the DL once.  The odds are he'll be there again.  It's unlikely the CHW will avoid running up a yr of service on BMac.  I would not use BMac in this trade.  If anybody it should be Contreras. 14M/2yr.

The Sox can fork over the cash they got from NYY if need be.  That's not a

bad price for either the A's or the Rangers for the 11th ranked Contreras.

His value has never been higher. 

 

Trading Contreras high for Chavez low should net a high prospect as well.

Crede has ranked 66th, & 71st in the past two yrs.  So either guy would be a substantial upgrade.

 

Win share wise:

Blaylock/Chavez + BMac > Crede+Contreras

That's why you use Contreras instead.  BMac gives you more flexibility payroll for the future as well.

 

No gm in his right mind would take JC and his contract for a starting player right now, he is way too much of a question mark.

[JUGGERNAUT]

No gm in his right mind would take JC and his contract for a starting player right now, he is way too much of a question mark.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't know about that. It's a short-lived contract for a player that has always been considered a high prospective talent that seems to finally be realizing that talent. When the NYY's signed him he was considered better than the top pitching prospect in their organization. It's not like he's a fluke. This is what he was expected to do.