The A's in need of a Holliday?

by SwisherFan33 on May 15, 2008 3:01 PM PDT Comment 25 comments

I just read this article from the always amusing Ken Rosenthal.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8143654?MSNHPHMA

Basically, it points out that if the Rockies were to trade Holliday, the A's (among other teams) could make good use of him. I know were still in-between on how much to compete now, but can you imagine how amazing Holliday could be for the A's?!?!? Of course the Rockies would demand a haul of prospects which would go against the whole point of trading Swisher and Haren. However, a nice aspect would be that the A's could try to make him their franchise player for the future. Or they could always flip him after the 08 campaign if it doesn't work out. Lots of options...and its always fun to speculate.

0 recs | Comment 25 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Career @ Coors: .364/.426/.664, Career @ Everywhere Else: .274/.337/.445

Thanks, but no thanks.

by mikev on May 15, 2008 3:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Coors doesn't make THAT much of a difference

Some of that is, I suspect, random.

That being said, WTF would the A’s do with Holliday? They need another corner OF like I need another hole in my head. Not to say that Holliday wouldn’t help—he would—but he certainly wouldn’t be worth the Brinks truckload of prospects it would take to acquire him.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on May 15, 2008 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well PT, some might think you need the hole. :)

by theblackpearl on May 15, 2008 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, and I suspect they're the same people who think the A's need Holliday...

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on May 15, 2008 4:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I suppose a 3-way trade might be in order there

The A’s could spin, perhaps, Blanton off to somebody who then sends prospects to the Rockies so we get Holliday.

I don’t know. Obviously Billy won’t dump prospects for him, but he’s pretty good, and worth getting if we’re in it in July.

by Crosbino on May 15, 2008 7:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Blanton alone would, I guarantee, not be enough

The A’s would undoubtedly have to give up an elite prospect along with him—probably Cahill, given how much Colorado needs sinkerballers.

I’m not enamored of giving up that kind of payment for a year and a half rental of Matt Holliday.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on May 15, 2008 7:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

that giving up Cahill is too much for a Holliday rental. That’s why I proposed a 3-way deal. I don’t know who else would be included but if Beane wants Holliday, he’ll get him.

More likely, Rosenthal was just engaging in some idle speculation. There is not likely to be any truth to this at all.

by Crosbino on May 15, 2008 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's not just random

But, in general, teams “Get used” to their home park and perform slightly better there than on the road. Maybe it’s just the comfort of being at home, in familiar surroundings, etc.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on May 16, 2008 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

What corner outfielders?

I’d be happy to send them Travis Buck if they want him; Emil Brown, his run of good luck notwithstanding, can be DFAed at any moment if needed. I don’t want to block the Marabino Craft Patrol, but we aren’t if we’re really committed to giving him a shot in center.

So it goes.

by jeepers on May 19, 2008 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here's the A's 2009 prospect depth chart at corner OF

stipulating for now that Gonzalez is playing CF. (Parentheses are fringy guys.)

Jack Cust
Ryan Sweeney
Travis Buck
Chris Denorfia
Jeff Fiorentino
Aaron Cunningham
(Jon Zeringue)
(Javier Herrera)
Matt Sulentic
Corey Brown
Grant Desme

That is a lot of prospects. Compare to, eg, the list of third base prospects:

(Jeff Baisley)
Jesus Guzman

Again, not saying that Holliday isn’t an upgrade—just that he’s not enough of one to be worth what they’ll be asking.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on May 19, 2008 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Those road numbers

are still better than pretty much our entire team.

It’s too early in the season for the A’s to even consider a deal like that, though. There’s a good chance we’ll free fall out of contention between now and the trade deadline. If we’re in first place in late July, it might be a viable idea, especially if he can be signed to an extension.

So it goes.

by jeepers on May 19, 2008 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't worry

He can’t be. It’s frigging Boras.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on May 19, 2008 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ugh.

Didn’t realize that.

I think the A’s are at a point in their trajectory that they can make a long-term commitment to a talent like Holliday…but probably not at Boras’ price point.

So it goes.

by jeepers on May 19, 2008 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, in Cambodia

There is an A in Whimsy.

by FreeSeatUpgrade on May 15, 2008 4:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Nice DK reference!

by roscoe on May 15, 2008 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree that

Holliday, although he would help the offense, is not worth the price it would take to acquire him. There is no way in hell i would trade Cahill for him, probably not even straight up. Oakland lives and dies by it’s pitching, and right now they have a lot of good pitching prospects in the minors that we will see in the next 1-3 years. Undoubtedly some of them will fizzle out as most minor leaguers do, so what may appear to be a surplus to some people at the moment, will be dilluted as the players progress through the system on their way to Oakland. Unless he can be had for a Joe Blanton or Mike Sweeney type of player, which isn’t going to happen, it’s just not worth it.

"Put some ice on it. After that, there's nothing a few beers won't take care of. " -Pink

by OrlandoAsFan on May 16, 2008 7:12 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Don't worry

There’s no risk that Colorado would accept an offer of “just Cahill” anyway, regardless of whether the A’s want to offer it…

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on May 16, 2008 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

well that's good news

in my opinion. If the A’s were to make a splash in the free agent market in the next few years, i would be much more comfortable with them acquiring a hitter than a pitcher.

"Put some ice on it. After that, there's nothing a few beers won't take care of. " -Pink

by OrlandoAsFan on May 16, 2008 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

very good points...

I agree that the prospects to get Holliday would be very high, and of course if the A’s were to try to make him their franchise guy it would be pricey, especially with Boras being his agent. However, the A’s have tons of pitching in the majors and minors (although you can never have enough), but they don’t seem to have enough hitting. A future outfield of Holliday, C. Gonzalez and Buck would be very solid. Offensively it would anchor an infield of Barton, Ellis, Crosby, and Chavez (that’s me being optimistic). The pitching staff is pretty much set. I probably would think the overall price would be too high, but with the A’s going to Fremont Beane is definitely both a buyer and a seller. I am just having fun with this since getting swept by Cleveland is not fun.

by SwisherFan33 on May 16, 2008 8:03 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Agreed regarding

the Cleveland series. That was just pathetic. I didn’t even realize Matt Holliday was a Boras client. Given that, I think the A’s should stay away from him. The less Oakland has to do with Boras the better. From a financial aspect anyway.

"Put some ice on it. After that, there's nothing a few beers won't take care of. " -Pink

by OrlandoAsFan on May 16, 2008 8:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Is everyone forgetting that he could flip him in the offseason?

If BB is a buyer/seller which is more and more likely as long as we stop getting swept…. this could be intriguing for either Blaton + 1/2 a farm… or as part of a 3 way, BB seems to love.

I think he would be an excellent upgrade for 1/2 season if the deal is right. No Cahill/CarGon/DLS etc.

But he has enough periphery to get a deal done. Blanton + Ellis + Street (youth and a solid 2B are they’re desires) would get something in the works, but I don’t think its worth it for us unless it comes with Ian Stewart. (Chavez heir apparent)

The Stockton Ports pitching staff is better than the Orioles.

by gdub171 on May 16, 2008 11:24 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

When is the last time Beane actually did a 3-way deal?

A 3-way in baseball is like a 3-way in bed. Everyone fantasizes about it, but it doesn’t actually happen real often…

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on May 16, 2008 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

BB: Internat'l man of dealing

BB is the Austin Powers of GMs, if he wants a 3 way, there will be a 3 way. ;)

by passionately objective on May 16, 2008 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

June 2004

to Houston
Carlos Beltran

to Oakland
Octavio Dotel

to Kansas City
Mike Wood
Mark Teahen
John Buck

love, mike in canada

by oakland ehs on May 18, 2008 9:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The 2b is an FA after 2008.

Blanton is under control for one more year than Holliday, and is not price guaranteed, ie the Rockies would have to go year to year in arby with him. Same with Street. And they’re both starting to get more expensive. Holliday is price guaranteed, the Rockies know what they’re going to have to pay him. And the amount that they’re going to pay him, is a slight bargain.

If the Rockies are going to trade Holliday because he’s going to hit FA after 2009, I’d believe they would want players who have yet to hit arby, or are already price guaranteed, especially if you want them to throw Stewart in too.

ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524

by rfloh on May 16, 2008 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs