Garland For......

[SSH2005]

Blalock still worries the hell out of me with him Home - Away Splits from this season. The Sox have to look at him and wonder if he's good enough to overcome that. Frankly I'd just stick with Crede, if you could get him under control for another 3 seasons (which I know is a big if).

 

But besides Blalock, there's not a lot of options if you're looking for a 3rd baseman. Adrian Beltre possibly, but Seattle would have to pay some of his contract.

 

Otherwise I'd go for the reliever + quality prospects scenario.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The advantage of trading for Blalock is that he would be locked up to a very modest contract (4-years, $20 million), he's only 25, he's a lefty stick, and he would be moving from one hitter's park to another. It's too bad the Rangers' bullpen sucks so bad that they wouldn't have a decent reliever to throw into the deal.

 

I also wouldn't want a guy like Beltre who had a monster season in 2004, gets a huge contract based on this one great season, and then goes back to putting up mediocre numbers after stricter steroid testing is enacted. I think there's far too much risk involved with Beltre.

Edited December 16, 2005 by SSH2005

[beck72]

Regardless, we're trading two proven major league commodoties for another proven player and a prospect. Unless either of those pitchers are can't misses, they better include another mid-level player.

 

You have to ask yourself if they were highly touted, and Texas having the pitching problems they do, why would they entertain trading either? Must mean either they're several years away, or they're that desperate for pitching as to give up a can't miss prospect for Garland.

If you're Tex, you do this deal. They are looking to trade Blalock, with reports the Twins are involved. If they can get a quality 3b man and a #1 SP [Jon's not, but on Tex he would be] for a guy they want to trade and a AA prospect with an over 5 ERA [i'd like Danks myslef, for a 20 yr old in AA, that's not bad], with Texas' poor track record, they're in win now mode.

 

Getting 2 solid performers from the winning WS team wouldn't be a bad PR move as well

[DBAHO]

The advantage of trading for Blalock is that he would be locked up to a very modest contract (4-years, $20 million), he's only 25, he's a lefty stick, and he would be moving from one hitter's park to another.  It's too bad the Rangers' bullpen sucks so bad that they wouldn't have a decent reliever to throw into the deal.

 

I also wouldn't want a guy like Beltre who had a monster season in 2004, gets a huge contract based on this one great season, and then goes back to putting up mediocre numbers after stricter steroid testing is enacted.  I think there's far too much risk involved with Beltre.

Some things that you've said there, moving from one hitters park to another, well that isn't a guarantee that he's going to return to his prior numbers, and who knows what Greg Walker will do to him as he goes from one of the best hitting coaches in baseball to one of (well this is what the majority of White Sox fans think) the worst.

 

You've got to remember with Beltre, this was his first season in the AL, and his righty power just isn't suited to Safeco at all. Not advocating trading for him, but if Seattle paid quite a bit of his contract, and he'll have more lefty protection in this lineup, with his excellent fielding as well, I think he'd be a better chance than Blalock to bounce back, but that's JMHO.

[beck72]

Some things that you've said there, moving from one hitters park to another, well that isn't a guarantee that he's going to return to his prior numbers, and who knows what Greg Walker will do to him as he goes from one of the best hitting coaches in baseball to one of (well this is what the majority of White Sox fans think) the worst.

 

You've got to remember with Beltre, this was his first season in the AL, and his righty power just isn't suited to Safeco at all. Not advocating trading for him, but if Seattle paid quite a bit of his contract, and he'll have more lefty protection in this lineup, with his excellent fielding as well, I think he'd be a better chance than Blalock to bounce back, but that's JMHO.

I disagree on Beltre vs Blalock. He had one career yr [in his walk yr-very suspicious] while Blalock had one down yr.

 

IMO, Blalock got homer happy like Pods did. Blalock was talked about being in the same hitting mold as George Brett and Tony Gywnn. Getting in love with the HR, after the 04 ASG, probably has hurt him more than anything.

 

One thing to consider--in 2004 he hit in the #2 hole for Tex. For his career, he has #'s like .285/.355/.500 hitting there in close to 500 ab's. If he can hit in the #2 hole, he has some skills the sox could use

[SSH2005]

Some things that you've said there, moving from one hitters park to another, well that isn't a guarantee that he's going to return to his prior numbers, and who knows what Greg Walker will do to him as he goes from one of the best hitting coaches in baseball to one of (well this is what the majority of White Sox fans think) the worst.

 

You've got to remember with Beltre, this was his first season in the AL, and his righty power just isn't suited to Safeco at all. Not advocating trading for him, but if Seattle paid quite a bit of his contract, and he'll have more lefty protection in this lineup, with his excellent fielding as well, I think he'd be a better chance than Blalock to bounce back, but that's JMHO.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can understand how Beltre would lose homeruns due to Safeco but his AVG and OBP both dropped back down to his 2001 to 2003 levels when he was basically a Joe Crede clone. Beltre has had more seasons putting up Crede-like numbers than like his 2004 season. I know players oftentimes have monster seasons in their free agent years but to me it casts a lot of doubt on how natural Beltre's 2004 season was.

Edited December 16, 2005 by SSH2005

[DBAHO]

I disagree on Beltre vs Blalock. He had one career yr [in his walk yr-very suspicious] while Blalock had one down yr.

 

IMO, Blalock got homer happy like Pods did. Blalock was talked about being in the same hitting mold as George Brett and Tony Gywnn. Getting in love with the HR, after the 04 ASG, probably has hurt him more than anything.

 

One thing to consider--in 2004 he hit in the #2 hole for Tex. For his career, he has #'s like .285/.355/.500 hitting there in close to 500 ab's. If he can hit in the #2 hole, he has some skills the sox could use

Just looking at some more stats here for Blalock vs. Beltre in 2005;

 

They both had RC/G of 4.7. Beltre had about 30-40 less K's then Blalock, and he had a Gross Production Average of .255 compared to Blalock's .239.

 

You can make an argument either way. Because Blalock's got the far better contract, that's probably the way the Sox will head if they want a 3rd baseman.

[SSH2005]

Just looking at some more stats here for Blalock vs. Beltre in 2005;

 

They both had RC/G of 4.7. Beltre had about 30-40 less K's then Blalock, and he had a Gross Production Average of .255 compared to Blalock's .239.

 

You can make an argument either way. Because Blalock's got the far better contract, that's probably the way the Sox will head if they want a 3rd baseman.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly what I'm thinking.

Edited December 16, 2005 by SSH2005

[beck72]

Because Blalock's got the far better contract, that's probably the way the Sox will head if they want a 3rd baseman.

Very important, as the sox want to lock up both their pitchers and position players. With Blalock locked up for yrs at a reasonable contract, is young and has upside, makes a lot of sense

[Flash Tizzle]

I can understand how Beltre would lose homeruns due to Safeco but his AVG and OBP both dropped back down to his 2001 to 2003 levels when he was basically a Joe Crede clone.  Beltre has had more seasons putting up Crede-like numbers than like his 2004 season.  I know players oftentimes have monster seasons in their free agent years but to me it casts a lot of doubt on how natural Beltre's 2004 season was.

 

If we're trading Garland and Crede, I'd rather have Blalock in return than Beltre for reasons you've illustrated. If Beltre had reasonably duplicated his numbers from his contract year in Los Angeles, I would be interested. Although if that were to occur, I doubt Seattle would entertain offers for a trade. Dropping off the planet in every conceivable offensive cateogry doesn't bode well for future success. Certaintly not a trade worthy of the money paid to him, even if statistics rebound slightly.

 

What Seattle offers that is ideal for a Garland trade is solid relief pitching. Not sure about their farm system. Wonder how Soriano's recovery is going. Packaging Garland for Villone, top prospect or Soriano, top prospect, mid-level prospect might be an attractive offer.

Edited December 16, 2005 by Flash Tizzle

[SSH2005]

What Seattle offers that is ideal for a Garland trade is solid relief pitching. Not sure about their farm system. Wonder how Soriano's recovery is going. Packaging Garland for Villone, top prospect or Soriano, top prospect, mid-level prospect might be an attractive offer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ron Villone is on the Marlins. They traded for him at the deadline last season. And Soriano has great stuff but I would think his trade value would be extremely low after missing the past two seasons due to injury.

Edited December 16, 2005 by SSH2005

[DBAHO]

Ron Villone is on the Marlins.  They traded for him at the deadline last season.

They've still got guys like Julio Mateo who could be quite useful for us. And I'd love the Aussie Chris Snelling if he could actually stay healthy for more than 2 months.

[Flash Tizzle]

Ron Villone is on the Marlins.  They traded for him at the deadline last season.

 

Mariners may want to update their MLB.com statistics webpage. I thought perhaps Seattle re-acquired Villone admist Florida's firesale.

 

Replace Putz or Mateo with Villone.

Edited December 16, 2005 by Flash Tizzle

[Flash Tizzle]

And Soriano has great stuff but I would think his trade value would be extremely low after missing the past two seasons due to injury.

 

Which is why including him in a trade is intriuging. Not as a centerpiece, certaintly, but under the assumption he's nothing but a recovering arm until proven otherwise. We can take a risk with him. Seattle may be more willing to exchange several quality prospects with Soriano in the deal. Unlike Dotel, whose services would have to wait until midseason, Soriano could contribute immediately. Is it unreasonable to expect Soriano to mach Vizcaino or Marte's 2005 numbers? It'll take time to fully recover from Tommy Johnl; but a 80% Soriano would be a welcomed contribution to our bullpen. Include him with one higher tier prospect, one or two middle, and I'd take the risk.

 

Of course, this wouldn't be my first option. Or second. Or third. Depending on the status of the prospect in question, and what's his estimated arrival into the majors, it beats essentially exchanging Garland for a mid-level prospect as part of a proposed Rangers trade.