Would you trade BMac for Carl Crawford?

[Balta1701]

Oh my God.

I hope you read Flash Tizzle's response to this. Balta, you are blaming Ozzie for perhaps "robbing him of

the chance to be the dominant pitcher we saw at the end of 2005?"

 

If BMac is that sensitive, my gawd, he is nothing to begin with.

We had 5 starters this year. The Organization as Tizzle said, wanted BMac to fill the middle relief role.

We had five starters. How did Ozzie rob him of anything; it gave McCarthy a chance to stay in the big

leagues. Nobody in the world was going to start BMac over any of our five starters once we got Vas.

It's KW's fault for acquiring Vas if anything.

The problem was not just that BMac was in the bullpen. The problem I saw was the way BMac was used out of the bullpen.

 

When BMac actually got regular work, he was able to work with some level of effectiveness out of the bullpen. June and July are prime examples. He struggled in May when he was asked to make 1 spot start and then given 10 days off afterwards. He struggled in September after he had a long off-time in late August with what was rumored to be an injury.

 

Brandon was never used in the role he needed to be used in. He needed to be used any time one of our starting pitchers started struggling. ANY time. He needed to get to 100+ innings this year. He was used instead as just another righty setup man, while all the effort and all the innings were again given to the starters. Our bullpen is going to wind up with the fewest innings pitched in baseball, by a lot. BMac alone should have made up some of that difference, and I think it hurt both him and our starters that he wasn't used that way.

[greg775]

When BMac actually got regular work, he was able to work with some level of effectiveness out of the bullpen. June and July are prime examples

 

If that's all true, I can buy your argument.

Did BMac's workload get decreased big time all of a sudden?

I did also envision him being the guy who would get a ton of appearances as our

main middle relief "set up" guy.

If the numbers back you up on BMac (I'm too lazy to look it up) then I can buy

your argument.

I thought you meant BMac was messed up by not getting to start when we already

had five. my bad.

[Balta1701]

If that's all true, I can buy your argument.

Did BMac's workload get decreased big time all of a sudden?

I did also envision him being the guy who would get a ton of appearances as our

main middle relief "set up" guy.

If the numbers back you up on BMac (I'm too lazy to look it up) then I can buy

your argument.

I thought you meant BMac was messed up by not getting to start when we already

had five. my bad.

2 times during the season BMac's workload dropped suddenly. When Contreras went on the DL in May, BMac pitched in relief of Haeger for a couple of innings. He then sat for 5 days, and made 1 spot start. He then wasn't used for the next 9 days or so, give or take 1. When he came back, he spent a week getting shelled, most memorably by Cleveland.

 

BMac also had about a 2 week break in late August/Early September. His first outing after that was the 5 innings he threw against the Twins in the JD>Joe Nathan game. He was great that game. After that, he stank for about 3 weeks, during which his usage dropped even more.

 

Brandon put up an ERA of 3.38 in April, 2.70 in June, 3.68 in July, and 4.02 in August (but that was better until about the last few days of that month). He struggled in May and September...the 2 months where, out of the bullpen, he got the least use.

[GreatScott82]

.

 

Leaving the rotation as is and merely HOPING every starter improves is something that Quasimodo looking goof on the Northside Jim Hendry would do. Don't think like Jim Hendry.

dont ever refer me as jim hendry again. yes it might be wise to change the rotation a bit. but i am not considering anything like Hendy. He relied on broken arms, i will be relying on the fact that the starters will turn it around. Buerhle has proven he can do it, and Vazquez and coop figured things out. THe lose of BMac would hurt possibly in the long run, but right now, this team NEEDS a leadoff hitter.

Our top 3 weakenesses are:

1. Bullpen

2. Leadoff hitter and scrappy guys

3. scrappy guys to fit Ozzie's small ball style at the top and bottom of the orders

 

Our rotation is not a weakness at all. They had a down year, but with more rest and NO World Baseball Classic, they'll be back with full force in 2007. This team NEEDs a guy like Crawford. Dont settle for a guy like Pierre. Because thats what 'Jim Hendry' did and my friend I DONT think like him.

[beautox]

Reed Johnson of

1 year/$1.425M (2006)

 

* re-signed 12/05 (avoided arbitration)

* 1 year/$0.318 (2004)

* ML service: 2.145

[southsideirish71]

How are we unsure about his defense? He can sleepwalk his way to better defense than half the SS in the league.

 

Why are we worried about his contract? This team will have a $100M payroll next year. We don't really have much need to shed players who are still productive (yes Uribe is productive) and relatively cheap.

 

Uribe has walked 13 times this season, one was intentional. He's been brutal, and hasn't responded to coaching. BUT...Uribe walked 15 times in September and October last year, which just happened to correspond to the addition of a leg kick at the prompting of Frank Thomas and Walt Hriniak. I think the Sox bear some responsibility for not attempting to get Uribe the coaching that he apparently responds to.

 

Whatever salary, or pride that has to be swallowed, to hire on Mr. Hriniak will end up being less of a cost than finding a replacement for Uribe, and trading him when his value is at it's lowest.

 

Greg was quoted as saying that the leg kick was a red herring, and that it really didnt fix anything. And that Uribe adopting a spread stance like Pablo would solve all of his problems. The minute they ditched the leg kick Uribe became Taz again. Hrniak would be a welcome addition to our coaching lineup. I think getting some of our hitters specifically our younger hitters who have a hard time putting good wood on the ball constantly would be greatly helped by Walt. He preaches contact and a level swing. I think if Walt was here in say April, I dont know if Brian would of had the terrible start to this season.

 

Greg's offensive methodlogy is good for one thing, hitting home runs in large quantities. However it is not good for grinding it out and beating tough pitchers who dont give up the dong a lot. We need another voice to help our hitters put the wood on the ball more than just sitting up there and taking full home run cuts when all we need is a single.

 

I say ditch Walker, hire someone who preaches this methodology, and bring Hrniak as a special consultant to work with Uribe and some of our other youngers hitters.

Edited September 28, 2006 by southsideirish71

[SinkingShip06]

What's going to be fun is seeing how McCarthy's start tonight will completely change the opinion of a lot of people on this site.

 

doesn't change mine.

[beautox]

Smart.

 

Love to hear your off-season plan.

Sign Kerry Wood and Trade McCarthy for Mark Prior.

[beautox]

There's Nothing Rays Shouldn't Consider

Skip directly to the full story.

 

By JOE HENDERSON

 

Published: Sep 20, 2006

Related Links:

 

o More Joe Henderson Columns

o Henderson Blog: Straight Talk

 

ADVERTISEMENT

More from this channel:

 

Search for more information:

 

TBO.com Site Search | Tribune archive from 1990

 

ST. PETERSBURG - The baseball season was humming along nicely this summer when all of a sudden, bam! The Devil Rays became unwatchable. Night after night it's the same thing - can't hit, can't pitch, can't catch.

 

Can't win.

 

Now, we know they were two 'G's' short of a juggernaut to begin with. But they were feisty and even managed to win a few games along the way until they shipped out Aubrey Huff, et al., in trades. Throw in injuries to Scott Kazmir, Jonny Gomes and Casey Fossum and you've got the worst team in baseball.

 

It wasn't supposed to be this way, was it? Not after new owner Stu Sternberg promised an end to the Naimolian darkness when he took over control of the team last October.

 

The Rays' new ownership group has done a lot of things right; point conceded. Attendance will increase this year by about 300,000 over a year ago. That's amazing, considering the Rays are near the bottom of the league in hitting, pitching, defense - pretty much everything.

 

But let's not kid ourselves. Just 9,292 showed up for Tuesday's 5-4 loss to Baltimore that dropped them to 18-44 since the All-Star break. As another season nears the end with the Rays comfortably in the cellar, patience is giving way to indifference.

 

It's a tradition here to talk about the bright future, but as Manager Joe Maddon, Mr. Optimism himself, said, "Our on-field performance has to improve a lot. At least now we know the areas we need to improve."

Infield Needs Extreme Makeover

 

Rays management is coy about the offseason plans, but we can make some educated guesses.

 

Start by blowing up the entire infield - yes, even B.J. Upton. He has made 12 errors in 38 games at third base since his promotion from Durham. That translates to about 50 per season.

 

He either needs to find a new position or head back to Durham. Or, dare we say it, be traded to a team where he might be a better fit.

 

Jorge Cantu is showing signs of regaining his bat after injuries slowed him most of the season, but his defense at second base simply isn't good enough. The Rays can't open next season with him there.

 

Shortstop Ben Zobrist is a good glove, but it's questionable whether he will hit enough to justify a starting position. The Rays are 14-32 since trading Julio Lugo on July 31, and part of that is the production lost by subbing Zobrist for Lugo.

 

The Rays led 3-0 Tuesday, but so what? They've lost a league-high 56 games in which they led. Obviously the bullpen is a mess, but so is the starting pitching and defense. Oh, and the offense, too.

Everyone Should Be Available

 

Improving the bullpen is the top priority. This is a simplification, but if you cut that 56-loss total from the blown leads in half, the Rays would have 28 more wins. They would be in the wild-card race.

 

The Rays have to stop filling the gap with guys who washed out as starters at Durham. Get three proven middle relievers this winter.

 

Don't stop there. Find a first baseman with power and move Ty Wigginton back to third. And if someone wants to open the vault in exchange for Carl Crawford or Rocco Baldelli, consider it.

 

That's a lot to accomplish in one offseason, yes. It's also life in the big leagues. Put up an "Open For Business" sign at the winter meetings and get to work.

 

Make this team something to watch again.

 

It starts with an open mind and ends with an open checkbook. Nothing else will do

TBO.com

[beck72]

You do realize Juan Pierre is going to get $9M+ per this offseason right? Soriano will likely make around $15M a year and considering how much better Soriano is than Pierre I'd say Soriano is worth the extra $4M-$6M per year. Juan Pierre is going to make a lot more money than some people think he's going to get.

 

Soriano should make $13 mill a yr. Pierre should get $7 mill a yr. I'm not sold on Soriano for his d. Plus his 2006 year was in his contract yr. I'm not saying the sox should get Pierre. but I am saying no to Soriano

[southsider2k5]

Well first of all, I thought very highly of B-Mac before this year and going into this season but the way Ozzie has handled him this year I think ruined him. I think he could be good in a few years maybe even sooner but I think Crawford would be a great player with this team. He would be an all-star every year IN MY OPINION if he was on a better team than the d-rays. He would be great for the sox he would get into scoring position for our guys to drive him in and he is a good hitter where he can drive in a lot of runs as well. I think we would be stupid to not take that type of deal. Also, theres potential pitchers floating around every year with hype and coming into the league im pretty sure if we got rid of McCarthy we could easily just get another one somewhere else or draft another one. Potential pitching studs I hear about all the time, most of them never ammount to much and Crawford has already proven to be a good everyday MLB player.

 

Thats my take, rip me apart if you wish.

 

I think Brandon's preformance was ripping enough.

[VAfan]

The problem was not just that BMac was in the bullpen. The problem I saw was the way BMac was used out of the bullpen.

 

When BMac actually got regular work, he was able to work with some level of effectiveness out of the bullpen. June and July are prime examples. He struggled in May when he was asked to make 1 spot start and then given 10 days off afterwards. He struggled in September after he had a long off-time in late August with what was rumored to be an injury.

 

Brandon was never used in the role he needed to be used in. He needed to be used any time one of our starting pitchers started struggling. ANY time. He needed to get to 100+ innings this year. He was used instead as just another righty setup man, while all the effort and all the innings were again given to the starters. Our bullpen is going to wind up with the fewest innings pitched in baseball, by a lot. BMac alone should have made up some of that difference, and I think it hurt both him and our starters that he wasn't used that way.

 

Balta, you disagreed with another of my posts regarding BMac, but I noticed this and I couldn't agree more. We had 5 starters that struggled big time at one point or another during the season, one of whom, Vazquez, predictably melted down in the 6th inning of at least 10-15 of his starts. You could have planned to have McCarthy start the 6th inning of all of those games AND used him to relieve the other guys who struggled.

 

So the issue is, what do you do next season? If we had a do-over, the easy answer is to never make the Vazquez trade. We could have used El Duque in the bullpen (or traded him somewhere else) and to keep Contreras on his proper arm angle, Vizcaino certainly would have helped, and we'd still have Chris Young, who among the trio of BA, Sweeney, and Young, probably has the highest upside.

 

But we don't have a do-over. I would agree that we can't trade BMac, but which starter can we trade? If I had to pick one it would be Vazquez. Decent stuff, but doesn't have the mental makeup to be a winner. Would the D-Rays take Vazquez for Crawford?? No. But would they take Vazquez and Fields? To my mind, that should be more than enough. I know Crede's got back issues and Scott Boras is his agent. Still, I think he's a gamer well worth whatever the Sox will need to pay to keep him. And that leaves Fields without a real position to play.

 

One problem with Crawford, however, is his splits suggest he SUCKS as a lead off hitter.

 

By Batting Order AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS

Batting #1 87 14 22 3 1 0 9 9 0 15 5 1 .253 .323 .310 .633

Batting #2 342 53 111 13 11 15 49 20 2 46 31 7 .325 .363 .558 .921

Batting #3 159 19 45 4 3 3 18 7 2 22 20 1 .283 .321 .403 .724

[RockRaines]

Smart.

 

Love to hear your off-season plan.

I wouldnt. Pretty worthless IMO.

[ZoomSlowik]

dont ever refer me as jim hendry again. yes it might be wise to change the rotation a bit. but i am not considering anything like Hendy. He relied on broken arms, i will be relying on the fact that the starters will turn it around. Buerhle has proven he can do it, and Vazquez and coop figured things out. THe lose of BMac would hurt possibly in the long run, but right now, this team NEEDS a leadoff hitter.

Our top 3 weakenesses are:

1. Bullpen

2. Leadoff hitter and scrappy guys

3. scrappy guys to fit Ozzie's small ball style at the top and bottom of the orders

 

Our rotation is not a weakness at all. They had a down year, but with more rest and NO World Baseball Classic, they'll be back with full force in 2007. This team NEEDs a guy like Crawford. Dont settle for a guy like Pierre. Because thats what 'Jim Hendry' did and my friend I DONT think like him.

 

Seriously? Starting pitching was clearly our biggest issue all year. Something needs to be done about that. The lowest ERA of any of our starters right now is 4.27, and Contreras is the only one under 4.60 right now. While they all underacheived, it's pretty asanine to think all of them are suddenly going to go back to kicking ass next year, especially when Garcia has clearly lost some stuff, Garland clearly had a career year last season, Buehrle is gased and has lost confidence, Jose is ancient, and Javy is inconsistent. Rest can only do so much, Buehrle and Contreras look to be the only guys that are really affected (and some of that seems to be related to nagging injuries). I'm not saying we need to blow up the rotation, but going in with the same 5 next year isn't going to magically make our rotation great. At least one of them needs to go. 2 or 3 of them very well can turn it around, but all 5 is unlikely. Kenny needs to evaluate which of his guys is the least likely to pitch well next year and trade him (my vote is Garcia, though you could easily make a case for Jose or Buehrle).

 

Crawford is solid, but we don't absolutely need him. We put up some solid offensive totals with virtually nothing in the leadoff spot. We don't need to sell the farm to get someone like Crawford, especially when all is said and done he didn't out-perform Pierre all that much outside of driving in runs.

 

The bullpen just isn't anywhere near as big an issue, not with Jenks-MacDougal-Thornton at the backend. Yeah, we can use a middle reliever or two, but so can everyone. Leadoff is definitely an issue, but not a crippling one given the rest of our lineup. As for the "scrappy guys" part, Pods and Uribe are about the only guys we can replace (I like Anderson), and that's if we find acceptable pieces.

Edited September 28, 2006 by ZoomSlowik

[witesoxfan]

But we don't have a do-over. I would agree that we can't trade BMac, but which starter can we trade? If I had to pick one it would be Vazquez. Decent stuff, but doesn't have the mental makeup to be a winner. Would the D-Rays take Vazquez for Crawford?? No. But would they take Vazquez and Fields?

 

I am getting sick and tired of people trying to trade Vazquez. What part of 2nd best starter in the 2nd half do people not understand?

 

Decent stuff? How about best stuff of anyone with a chance in hell of starting that is in the Chicago White Sox organization? I'm not sure you've ever really watched him pitch. 93-96 fastball with movement, snapdragon curve, very good slider, and a respectable change...there's no one in the organization with better s*** than that...that starts anyways(MacDougal and Jenks are pretty much both disgusting as hell, but they pitch about 80 innings a year if they're both healthy)

 

And HELL NO the DRays would not take Vazquez and Fields. Vazquez's value is low as hell right now, trading him brings back a negative return. Add on to the fact that he's 29-30 now, heading towards the middle to late stages of his career, and, oh yeah, the DRays sure as hell don't want him, seeing as how he makes $12 mill a year and all.

 

If you want Crawford, it's going to cost atleast one top 5 pitching prospect; from there, it may cost another top 10-15 prospect, as well as a throw-in or two as well. If I had to take an absolute guess right now, the best offer the Sox could put on the table for Crawford right now would be McCarthy, Fields, and Broadway/Egbert, and that still may not get it done. If the Sox are at all serious about acquiring Crawford, they will need to ship out one of the starters(Garcia/Buehrle/Contreras...all have their reasons for going) for pitching prospects, and then send those over to Tampa along with probably Fields for Crawford.

 

One problem with Crawford, however, is his splits suggest he SUCKS as a lead off hitter.

 

LOL...using 1 year as an example?

 

How about the fact that he actually is suited better to be hitting lower in the order, thus Maddon has him hitting 2nd? You want an example of what Crawford will do leading off, look at Jimmy Rollins. That's pretty much perfect for comparison's sake. Maybe it's just me, but I can overlook at .338 OBP when my leadoff man is in scoring position seemingly half the time, while he's driving himself in 20-25 times a year, which is what Rollins or Crawford would do for the Sox.

[Balta1701]

But we don't have a do-over. I would agree that we can't trade BMac, but which starter can we trade? If I had to pick one it would be Vazquez. Decent stuff, but doesn't have the mental makeup to be a winner. Would the D-Rays take Vazquez for Crawford?? No. But would they take Vazquez and Fields? To my mind, that should be more than enough. I know Crede's got back issues and Scott Boras is his agent. Still, I think he's a gamer well worth whatever the Sox will need to pay to keep him. And that leaves Fields without a real position to play.

 

One problem with Crawford, however, is his splits suggest he SUCKS as a lead off hitter.

 

By Batting Order AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS

Batting #1 87 14 22 3 1 0 9 9 0 15 5 1 .253 .323 .310 .633

Batting #2 342 53 111 13 11 15 49 20 2 46 31 7 .325 .363 .558 .921

Batting #3 159 19 45 4 3 3 18 7 2 22 20 1 .283 .321 .403 .724

That was the 2006 Crawford version. But there are several things to note...first, you can not judge any player by 87 at bats. You just can't. It's too small of a sample size.

 

Second, a lot of those at bats for Crawford in the 1 hole this year came early in the season. I just checked the game logs...not going to count at bats, but it's a significant percentage. Crawford got off to a slow start this year...so there's probably some bit of a bias in that fact.

 

Here are Crawford's 03-05 numbers in the 1 hole: .294 .325 .430 .755. Here is his 2004 campaign, wen he was primarily a leadoff hitter: .302 .337 .460 .797 (59 steals). Here is 2005, where he lead off roughly 1/2 of the time. .290 .325 .458 .783.

 

If I had to pick one starter to go right now...it all depends on 1 issue, whether or not we can ink Mark Buehrle to an extension before December/January roll around. If Buehrle will not sign an extension or will not sign a reasonable extension, he must be dealt. He is simply too valuable of a piece to have us lose him for nothing to free agency or to lose him for draft picks if they keep that. Right now we could still get a fortune for him, even after this down year. If we don't resign him, and he comes back next year with a great season, he may price himself out of our range...if he sucks next season and we haven't traded him, we may find ourselves holding him while his value plummets.

 

If Buehrle can not be signed, he must be dealt. If we can ink an extension, then we keep him.

 

After that...we take whatever gives us the most talent in return. Garcia would be an obvious one to deal because his contract is also up in 07, but if someone is willing to give me a lot more talent for Contreras or Vazquez, I'd be open to that. You do whatever improves the team the most.

[beautox]

Really intresting research done by Jim over at Sox Machine

 

Brandon McCarthy: He's ready

When the season's over, Brandon McCarthy's final numbers aren't going to look great -- though they'll look a little better thanks to his excellent start tonight.

 

Barring any final work in the Minnesota series, here's what his 2006 will looks like:

 

W-L 4-7

IP 84.2

H 77

ER 44

HR 17

BB 33

K 69

ERA 4.68

WHIP 1.30

 

It's not necessarily a terrible line, but it wouldn't bowl anybody over -- especially when weighing it to try to decide whom McCarthy should replace in a Sox rotation with five proven starters.

 

On the other hand, I've gone through his game log to separate outings in which he recorded four or more outs, and sized them up against ones where he recorded zero to three.

 

This isn't perfectly scientific, but I figure it's a quick-and-dirty way to determine which outings resembled something like a start for Brandon, to separate them from ones where Brandon may start his outing pitching from the stretch, or in a situation where one swing can decide the game.

 

Here's what his numbers look like then:

 

Outs 0-3

IP 19.2

H 33

ER 25

HR 8

BB 16

K 17

ERA 11.44

WHIP 2.49

 

Outs 4+

IP 65

H 44

ER 19

HR 9

BB 17

K 52

ERA 2.63

WHIP 0.94

 

I still could be wrong, because I had to tally these up by hand. But I've thrice gone over the 26 outings where he's recorded four or more outs, and I've subtracted those numbers from his season total to get the stats from the 27 outings in which he recorded three outs or fewer. If somebody wants to independently verify these numbers, by all means do.

 

If these numbers are true, then that split is far greater than I imagined. That's not to say he'll post a sub-3.00 ERA as a starter, but the numbers -- and eyes -- say he throws a far different game when he knows he's in it for the long(ish) haul.

 

Give the man a rotation spot next year. And Charlie Haeger may not be far behind.

 

Muy Interesante

Edited September 28, 2006 by beautox

[RockRaines]

The hole with that last post is that the 0-3 outs might have been where they wanted him to go more innings, he just couldnt get anyone out.

[NorthSideSox72]

The hole with that last post is that the 0-3 outs might have been where they wanted him to go more innings, he just couldnt get anyone out.

^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

Big time polluting factor there. Not a good measure.

[beautox]

The hole with that last post is that the 0-3 outs might have been where they wanted him to go more innings, he just couldnt get anyone out.

I agree but as he states "This isn't perfectly scientific", i just threw it out there for a matter of discussion. if someone wanted to take the time and go by every game log and see which cases were 0-3 in a close and late sitiuation, or a situation with men on base, i'd be really intrestead to see what comes about.

[Greg The Bull Luzinski]

Only way we get Crawford is a three way deal that send Freddy or Vaz somewhere like Philly and Philly sends prospects/pitching to Tampa.

[Sox Machine]

^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

Big time polluting factor there. Not a good measure.

 

That first line doesn't mean much. It's mainly to sort the short outings -- both good and bad -- to see how he fared when he got the chance to go further.

 

I went a step further and removed the first three batters from the equation in the 20 outings in which he pitched two innings or more. He gave up 11 earned runs in 37 1/3 successive innings from those outings, or a 2.65 ERA.

 

It's not by any means perfect, but it does illustrate that when he does get to a second inning, he generally succeeds. That's pretty much what the story was with Freddy in 2005 -- given the way hitters beat him up in the first frame, he might've had as rough a year as Brandon out of the bullpen.

[DBAHO]

Only way we get Crawford is a three way deal that send Freddy or Vaz somewhere like Philly and Philly sends prospects/pitching to Tampa.

This is sort of what I was getting it in my 1st post on this subject.

 

If you could trade say Contreras and Uribe to Texas for Danks, Arias and someone else, and then trade Fields and Danks to Tampa Bay for Crawford, that would probably work.

 

Danks has top of the rotation potential, and Fields will be a building block at 3rd base for them. We keep B-Mac, and get a young SS in Arias, which is something we don't have in our system. You could then sign a FA like Gonzalez to a 1 year deal until Arias is ready.

 

Either way, definitely can't see B-Mac getting dealt especially after his performance last night.

[SoxAce]

Andrew, I still like your trade with us and the Padres. It just makes too much sense. Maybe sweeten the deal up a bit with what I had in mind.

Edited September 29, 2006 by SoxAce

[witesoxfan]

This is sort of what I was getting it in my 1st post on this subject.

 

If you could trade say Contreras and Uribe to Texas for Danks, Arias and someone else, and then trade Fields and Danks to Tampa Bay for Crawford, that would probably work.

 

Danks has top of the rotation potential, and Fields will be a building block at 3rd base for them. We keep B-Mac, and get a young SS in Arias, which is something we don't have in our system. You could then sign a FA like Gonzalez to a 1 year deal until Arias is ready.

 

Either way, definitely can't see B-Mac getting dealt especially after his performance last night.

 

So are they going to pencil Upton into the DH role for the next 5 years?