Here's A New Idea: Khalil Greene
by Helloooo 1st on Nov 4, 2008 8:24 PM PST
Email
PrintI was perusing the mlb.com Hot Stove Roundup and the first part of the story is about how the Padres are shopping not only Jake Peavy but Khalil Greene as well. Yes he had a poor, injury-plagued season last year, but the year before he hit 27 homeruns playing half of his games in pitcher-friendly Petco Park. He's known for playing above-average defense also and is signed for this season at $6.5 MM. So to look at him overall: he's relatively young (just recently turned 29), has hit pretty well in years past, and plays good defense.
Now the big knock on him is his discipline. It's bad. His career OBP is .304 which hurts his career OPS (.731). The most walks he's taken in a season was 53 in '04 and he hasn't approached that number since then (25, 39, 32, 22). He's also missed a chunk of time in every season besides '07, but I wouldn't call him injury prone. Last year's big injury was due to him breaking his hand from a punch to a trash can. Stats
I'm not saying that Greene is going to take us to the top, because it's entirely possible that he could be just as bad if not worse than Crosby. I am, however, trying to think outside the box and maybe a change of scenery could work, especially if we can instill some sense of the strike zone within him. If he doesn't work out then let him go at the end of the season, but if he shows improvement then we may have an answer at shortstop for the next few seasons. I'm sure it won't take a whole lot to get him, probably an Eveland or a Smith. If you want to expand the package to get more than just Greene then throw in a Mazarro or so.
I pose the question to you AN, Oui or Niet?
40 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
he makes 6.5mill, signed for 1 yr
honestly he’s like a more healthy, more power crosby w/ a low avg and low obp
esp at the cost of smith/eveland, and ESPECIALLY at the cost of mazzaro
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 5, 2008 7:48 AM PST up reply actions
I think Green is a decent player but no one to go crazy about. I would rather see Pennington…and I certainly don’t think trading Smith is a good idea!
by ilovegregsmith on Nov 5, 2008 5:11 PM PST up reply actions
agree with gROVER
this is the kind of thing im interested in hearing more of.
(though preferably about guys that can take a walk)
Save Rajai Davis
Yeah, my cat has been much too "empowered" lately
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I'd much rather...
…go after either Yunel Escobar or Hardy. Both are “available” although probably more expensive in a trade than Greene. But I honestly view Greene as Jack Wilson (who’s also "available") with more upside and more downside. Both will be adequate at best defensively and both will OPS+ between 75 and 100 (with Greene more likely than Wilson to fall out of that range in either direction).
If we’re gonna fix SS, let’s do it right. (Trade for Brandon Wood!! And if we’re dreaming Wilmer Flores and/or Mike Moustakas would be nice)
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
I want those too
The point of this was purely to throw another option out there. I realize Greene is nothing special, but say we get Giambi and Ordonez, I think it’d be a nice idea to take a flier on Greene and see if he can have a good year which is not entirely out of the question since it’s his walk year.
"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin
their plan
crosby plays out his contract
he doesnt have much value right now…maybe has a good 1st half by trade deadline.
let pennington progress in utility role, buy more time for cardenas
by Asfan4ever723 on Nov 5, 2008 7:38 AM PST up reply actions
escobar not available
The braves will not put him in a trade for Peavy so don’t even think about him. He would be a great pick up. greene is a slight up grade. Hardy is the best option but what will it take? Street plus who else?
The only reason I would consider acquiring Greene is if the Padres are willing
to do a Greene-Crosby “change of scenery” swap. Under no circumstances would I consider giving up a valuable young player.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
beane makes an appearance
i was getting worried…its been forst lately and beane busy with soccer, health care, and video games
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ti-gmmeetings110408&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
Oakland Athletics GM Billy Beane often is a stealth figure at these and the winter meetings. He stood with a couple of reporters who expressed amazement at a Beane sighting and replied, "Geez, I feel like J.D. Salinger or something."
Anyway, Beane said everybody else could go with athletic players and manufactured runs.
"I’d like to have nine guys who all hit 30 home runs," he said. "I’d rather have that. It’s still the most efficient way to score runs. Give me two walks and a home run any day."
It is, of course, no wonder Beane pines for offense. His A’s were last in the AL in runs last season and 11th in home runs. And it is why they’ll spend the winter looking for a big bat, from either side.
Here's an idea that's outside of the box
Trade for Russel Martin. Their GM says he’s NOT available, but his name has come up more than once.
He’d cost quite a bit, he’s young, he can HIT, and he’s a catcher.
But he could come over and play third… fill in that hole at third, fill in that hole in the lineup where we need power and a right handed batter. He could catch for Suzuki every few days so that he doesn’t end up catching for another 140+ games and turn his knees to rocks in a couple years.
Just an idea…
I'd love Martin
But if he’s not available the he’s not available, and I don’t feel like giving up the farm for him. But we love speculating about the Dodgers and their young players so if we could get Martin and either Hu or DeJesus I feel it would be worth what we’d have to give up (Mazarro, Eveland, and/or Smith).
"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin
by Helloooo 1st on Nov 5, 2008 11:54 AM PST up reply actions
If they succeed in re-signing Furcal, the A's should put the full court press on for DeJesus
He is, by a long shot, the SS prospect that I like the most in the upper minors. (Obviously various Beckhams are around but not really available.)
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
They still owe us a favor for Loaiza, don't they? Maybe Beane can capitalize and get them to trade Dejesus for something reasonable
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 5, 2008 1:58 PM PST up reply actions
Didn't they already pay us back by assuming the $10 million it would cost for Loaiza to suck?
by WhiteElephants on Nov 5, 2008 2:59 PM PST up reply actions
ya i kno, i just want Ethier back...
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 5, 2008 10:30 PM PST up reply actions
Prediction: The A's currently have at least 4 outfielders in their organization who are/will be more valuable than Ethier
by thejd44 on Nov 5, 2008 11:42 PM PST up reply actions
Apparently you are unaware of how good Ethier is...
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I appreciate the optimism
but Ethier is proven, none of our current prospect OF’s are (with the exception of swooney). I don’t think all of our OF prospects are going to workout just because that is the nature of the game. Of course, weirder things have happened, but I’d still take Ethier in a heartbeat if I could.
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 6, 2008 9:14 AM PST up reply actions
I'm hearing some bad things about White Sox Beckham
Sickels didn’t much care for what he saw, though it was of course one game.
by thejd44 on Nov 5, 2008 11:41 PM PST up reply actions
We would have to give up much more than just Mazzarro, Eveland and Smith
Everyone knows they aren’t in our future plans. They’re not going to give up a young stud and a good prospect for that. No way, no how.
A deal for Martin would have to include...
2 (or if we’re lucky maybe 1) of Kurt, Cahill, and Anderson.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
its gotta be 2 of those...Kurt and Anderson? plus probably a throw in OF and some low A player
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 5, 2008 10:31 PM PST up reply actions
If it's one, the deal prolly looks like
Cahill, Mazzaro/Simmons, Donaldson, and Cardenas.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
count me out then....i'm keeping cardenas....but i'll give them mazzaro and donaldson
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 6, 2008 9:15 AM PST up reply actions
Is Martin actually better than Suzuki?
Or, maybe a better way to put it, is he enough better to be worth Suzuki plus a top prospect? I don’t think so. I think moving to the better league and a tougher park to hit in would even out the numbers between the two. Martin would still be the better offensive player, but not by that much.
I’d only want Martin for third base (From what I’ve seen, he looks decent there. Dunno how he actually is though).
by thejd44 on Nov 5, 2008 11:45 PM PST up reply actions
Martin would be colossally wasted at third base
His bat barely plays there. His value comes from a. playing catcher, and b. playing a TON of games there.
It’s more than a little ironic that the catcher he most resembles in MLB is… Kurt Suzuki.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
They don't call them colossals anymore
I think it’s Coliseum and Stadium, which is confusing in itself. Oh, and then there’s the Big Dog. No confusion there. You can feed a small country with that thing.
I'm here to talk about the past.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
