Blanton Trade Thread
by Taj Adib on Dec 16, 2007 3:40 PM PST
105 comments
As per Buster Olney's ESPN insider blog today, the Mariners are stepping up efforts to obtain Blanton via trade. This is not shocking as Seattle has been rebuffed in their efforts to acquire pretty much every other starting pitcher they've targeted so far this winter and badly need a reliable starter or three. Olney mentions that Adam Jones would be a necessary part of the package coming back for the A's.
I find this to be an intriguing trade idea. Sure the Mariners are in the same division as the A's, but the dynamics in the AL West have changed considerably since 2006 when the A's absolutely dominated the Mariners. With Beane waiving the white flag and the Rangers in rebuild mode as well, the division will likely be a battle between Seattle and Anaheim, and will be a one-sided battle at that if the Mariners don't find a few good starters.
Blanton for Jones straight up might be a net win for the A's in the long run, as "rfloh" pointed out in the Kuroda diary, since 6 years of a power hitting center fielder is a lot more valuable than 3 years of a mid-rotation control pitcher. And Bavasi might just be desperate enough to make that deal, but you never know. But it seems like Beane has planned on trying to acquire a bevy of lower level, projectable prospects for Blanton and Haren as opposed to just getting a major league ready stud or two.
In that same thread I floated the idea of packaging Blanton WITH Harden to entice the Mariners to give up more than just Jones. Acquiring Harden would be a calculated risk by Bavasi, but when he's healthy Rich has pitched extremely well in Seattle and is arguably just as talented as Erik Bedard, whom the Mariners have targeted as well. Getting Blanton mitigates some of the risk inherent with Harden and gives the Mariners an innings eater that has proven success in the AL West. With King Felix, Blanton and a relatively healthy Harden, the Mariners would suddenly have a front of the rotation that could match up well with the Angels.
In return for Blanton and Harden, Beane could ask for Jones and/ or any of these players:
Wladamir Balentien (not a CFer but an intriguing righty power bat)
Brandon Morrow (flame throwing Cal product)
Chris Tillman (young righty starter with good K-numbers in low minors)
Carlos Triunfel (highly projectable, super young middle infielder)
Emiliano Fruto (changeup artist with "mild" control problems)
Jeremy Reed (Beane favorite with good defensive skills in center)
- Another possible landing spot for Blanton is Cleveland, which showed interest in Haren last week. I could see Blanton fitting in well behind Sabathia and Carmona and in front of Westbrook and Byrd. The Indians tend to target the same type of players the A's do in the draft, so I could see Beane liking a few of the players in their system among them:
Adam Miller (One of the top starting prospects in all of baseball for many years)
Trevor Crowe (quintessential, switch hitting lead-off type that could play center)
Asdrubal Cabrera (strong armed infielder that made an impact in the playoffs last year)
John Drennen (projectable possible center fielder - also San Diego native)
I'm not that knowledgeable about Cleveland's system, but if they really want Blanton they could probably make it work.
- The Mets have been interested in Blanton for awhile. What about Blanton for Carlos Gomez and Kevin Mulvey?
- Or Blanton to the Reds for Johnny Cueto and Chris Valaika or Paul Janish?
What do with Blanton?
0 recs |
105 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I would love to have Jones straight up for Joe
and trading with Bavasi generally seems like a great idea.
by mikeA on Dec 16, 2007 3:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Indians
I wouldn't mind Blanton going to the Indians for Miller plus some more infield and pitching prospects.
by Threepwood XX on Dec 16, 2007 3:28 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I dunno
Miller has injury issues. Do we really want Harden 2.0?
by PaulThomas on Dec 16, 2007 3:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Injuries
I didn't know about those, no we don't. I just want to target a pitching prospect that has a chance at becoming an Ace, the A's need one of those to replace Harden and Haren.
by Threepwood XX on Dec 16, 2007 4:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Miller is very intriguing
He is one of the best prospects out there if healthy. But because he's not, he's available. If he could be got for Street or for Blanton it's certainly food for thought (ideally I'd like Laffey as well who is the more safe but low upside complement to Miller but without Haren I doubt that's happening).
by vignette17 on Dec 16, 2007 4:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"it appears they are in the thick of the trade bidding"
haha.
by mikeA on Dec 16, 2007 3:31 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Adam Jones
There's no way the M's trade Adam ".968 OPS in AAA" Jones for "Average Joe" Blanton.
Boy, it would be great... but it ain't gonna happen.
Jones would be pretty sweet though... Buck/Jones/Gonzalez with Swisher and Barton... that would be nice.
by brenarlo on Dec 16, 2007 4:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Swisher is gone too - why would Beane keep him?
Maybe SF Giants would be interested in Swisher?
Swisher gives them an AS at 1B upgrading the position over FA Klesko.
...or they might add him to the OF:
Swisher - Rowand - Winn.
Either way an offense is starting to develop and like most of SF key players he is locked up 5 more years.
We probably take back a starter.
by A s Eh on Dec 16, 2007 5:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Um, because he's signed to a sweetheart 5-year
contract?
by PaulThomas on Dec 16, 2007 11:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That makes him all the more valuable
on the trade market. If we could pry Lincecum or Cain loose with a Swisher offer (say Swisher and Street), that would be entirely worth it.
by jeepers on Dec 17, 2007 5:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sabean has taken them off the table
so that's pretty much a non-starter at this point.
by PaulThomas on Dec 17, 2007 6:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re-signing A-Rod was off the table, too.
It could simply be that Sabean hasn't seen the right offer yet. He could still really use a first baseman and a closer.
by jeepers on Dec 17, 2007 6:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Barton and Street would seem to make more sense
then.
But if I was Sabean, I'd be looking for offers like "Barton, Swisher AND Street." Which is obviously not something the A's are in a position to offer. Other than minor deals around the edges (DJ for Travis Denker?), the A's and Giants don't have a whole lot to offer each other right now.
by PaulThomas on Dec 17, 2007 7:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
getting adam jones would be hilarious
by xbhaskarx on Dec 16, 2007 4:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
lookout landing:
http://www.lookoutlanding.com/story/...
by xbhaskarx on Dec 16, 2007 4:05 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Thank you.
That was hilarious.
We can only hope Bavasi doesn't have as much common sense as they do in terms of who he'd give up, and has just as much when it comes to being willing to trade within the division.
by still bills kingdom on Dec 16, 2007 4:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This was the best conversation
The Mariners need pitchers.
The A's have pitchers available. Naturally, the M's are going to inquire as to the asking price for anyone and everyone.
Here's how this works:
Bavasi: Hi, is Blanton on the table?
Beane: Yes.
Bavasi: What's he gonna cost?
Beane: Jones.
Bavasi: Catch you later.
Beane: Peace out.
by Jeff on Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 05:56:24 PM EDT
But... what if Beane Double Dares him?
Visting A's fan.
by Zonis on Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 06:07:29 PM EDT
oh shit
by Jeff on Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 06:12:37 PM EDT
I love Lookout Landing.
by Threepwood XX on Dec 16, 2007 4:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I really enjoyed that one too
But I kinda liked this as well:
yeah
bavasi is an idiot, buffoon, and retarded but he isnt that stupid.by wadswerth on Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 05:18:48 PM EDT
[ Parent ]
by still bills kingdom on Dec 16, 2007 6:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I know Jones is supposed to be a good CFer
But if we do get Jones (and I greatly doubt that) we would have a crowded OF and 1b with Gonzalez, Swisher, Buck, Barton, Jones and Cust. Would it help us to move Jones back to SS where he played the majority of his first years in the minors? Or was his defense Uptonesque and enough to move him to the OF?
by vignette17 on Dec 16, 2007 4:25 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
he's a great outfielder and a great hitter
so it wouldn't be woth worrying about the crowding. Plus, none of the guys you named are CFs.
by mikeA on Dec 16, 2007 4:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Then you trade one of the others
Swish, unfortunately.
AJ is arguably one of the best position prospects right now. A great defenive CF who has hit well in the minors and is only 21. His numbers are masked by the fact that the Mariners have rushed him through the minors.
He is a better prospect than Chris Young, better than Matt Kemp.
by rfloh on Dec 16, 2007 10:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Eh?
Swisher is, depending on your view of Gonzalez's tools and Barton's power potential, at least 4th on that list (for 5 positions).
I'd vote Travis Buck off the island myself-- he's got a sweet stroke, but he can't seem to stay healthy.
by PaulThomas on Dec 16, 2007 11:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Swisher has more established value
Buck is injury prone and unproven. You are not going to get much back.
by rfloh on Dec 16, 2007 11:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Way too early to say Buck can't stay healthy
by mikeA on Dec 17, 2007 9:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, he's played 2 full pro seasons
In those seasons, he has played a combined total of 168 games.
Nick Swisher played in 157 games just in 2006.
by PaulThomas on Dec 17, 2007 9:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In 2006, Buck suffered from a sports hernia ...
which, not surprisingly, was misdiagnosed.
It is not something that would indicate any propensity for thumb sprains, hamstring sprains or the need to clean out his elbow (which seems to have been done more out of convenience, allowing him to shut it down to avoid reaggravating his hamstring injury while the team was out of contention and helping to prevent further problems with his elbow, than out of an immediate problem in need of correction)
Two seasons is a minuscule sample size, when we're talking about health. He did play a full slate of games in college/the minors from 2003 through 2005.
The beauty of small sample sizes, though, is that we can look at the actual evidence and consider the pieces individually instead of in the aggregate.
by devo on Dec 17, 2007 10:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I mean, sure
It's not like he's Mike Hampton or something. But it's an issue of concern. There are really 4 problems here:
- Bone chips are a recurring issue. Typically they're caused by calcium buildup, as the body attempts to "repair" bone fragments which shouldn't exist in the first place. If you've had them once, you're much more likely to have them again.
- Hamstring injuries (hellooo, Milton Bradley) are also a recurring issue, albeit one which can be solved by better conditioning.
- Buck seems to be a somewhat slow healer, in that similar issues to those of other players seem to knock him out for a longer period of time. Like the hamstring injury.
- The root cause of the wrist pain he had at times last year is, AFAIK, still unknown, so it might recur.
In any event, it would be at least a year before any significant decisions would have to be made vis a vis Gonzalez, in which time he could potentially either reestablish his health (and trade value) or drop out of the picture. Of course, there are wildcards here-- Denorfia, for one; Putnam could hit 15 home runs in two months and put himself in the picture too-- but it's never a bad thing to have options.
Certainly I would not suggest that the team trade Buck at any point in the next 10 months.
by PaulThomas on Dec 17, 2007 10:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Probably I'm objecting
to your use of the word "minuscule", not your actual point.
Two full seasons is maybe 10% of a career. That's small, but not minuscule.
(But on the bright side, at least you didn't misspell it. I fear that "miniscule" is poised to become the next "barbeque".)
by iglew on Dec 17, 2007 11:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Probably more like 15-20% ...
but that's not really relevant ...
The fact is, the sample size is 2.
The question is whether this mini-trend is symptomatic of a larger, presumably somewhat predictable problem or is simply random noise in the game of life. This is not like opinion sampling, where the ultimate answer is finite and definitively knowable, with a sufficiently large appropriately conducted and honestly answered census. In that case, the sample size, relative to the whole is quite relevant -- if you've sampled 99% of the population, there's a pretty good chance (and a mathematical certainty) that the last 1% won't change you results much.
Even if Buck were to suffer from an abnormally large number of injuries for most of his 12 year career, that would not necessarily answer the question of whether he was particularly prone to injuries. We can show this using probability. Lets say that the average player will have a 30% chance of being injured in any given season. If Buck were exactly average in that respect, he would still have a 14.5% of suffering injuries in at least 8 seasons of a 12 year career.
Basically, what I'm saying is that overall sampling to determine whether a player is injury prone is basically worthless -- it won't determine any meaningful results until its far too late to make a wise decision.
I'm not throwing up my hands in defeat, though. In the case of injuries, we have component information -- what the injuries actually were -- and we know whether they are the type that are likely to recur and whether the specific injuries, as a whole, point to a common root cause.
by devo on Dec 17, 2007 12:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is the problem with using only
statistics to asses what is a (sports) medical, bio mechanical, issue.
"In the case of injuries, we have component information -- what the injuries actually were -- and we know whether they are the type that are likely to recur and whether the specific injuries, as a whole, point to a common root cause."
Unless you have actual specifics, access to his medical and training records, knowing the type of injury is nowhere near enough, for most injuries.
There are a huge host of factors involved in injuries: condition, training, nutrition, rest, workload, both short term and long term, technique etc.
by rfloh on Dec 17, 2007 2:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I've got ten bucks on mischievious
by JediLeroy on Dec 17, 2007 2:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Fruto shouldn't be on that list
He went to Washington with Snelling in the Vidro trade and is now in the Diamondbacks system.
by Soaker on Dec 16, 2007 4:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough.
Plus he wasn't that good to begin with! Thanks for the heads up!
by Taj Adib on Dec 16, 2007 4:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Screw Jones...What ever happened to LA
What ever happened to the Pitching prospects? Yes, I know that LA recenently signed Kuroda to a lucrative contract, but they have shown a great amount of interest in Blanton especially during the All Star Break. Personally I would love to see Kershaw involved in a package deal, but we all know thats never going to happen. Wishing and dreaming aside, you have to look at it realistically and say that building a package around LHP Scott Elber would be the way to go.
Just me spitballin, but Billy never gets the prospects I would love to see on the A's.
by Oaklanda12 on Dec 16, 2007 4:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Dodgers
If the Dodgers would do Laroche and Kershaw for Blanton and Chavez the A's would be foolish not to pull the trigger.
by brenarlo on Dec 16, 2007 4:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Correction
If the Dodgers would do Laroche and Kershaw for Blanton and Chavez the [Dodgers] would be foolish [].
by PaulThomas on Dec 16, 2007 5:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Dodgers rotation is full
They already have:
Penny
Lowe
Billingsley
Kuroda
Schmidt
Loaiza
Kershaw
That's seven reasonable pitchers. Blanton is a mild upgrade on few of them. Even with injuries to Schmidt (just a matter of time), bad production from Loaiza (see Schmidt parentheses), and bad performance from Kuroda (quite possible), they have guys like Elbert they can call up. Or they could wait until midseason and if all those things happen, could then trade for a SP upgrade.
by vignette17 on Dec 16, 2007 5:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
trade thought (Indians)
How about Blanton and Street for Chuck Lofgren, Trevor Crowe, and A-Cabrera?
As stated above Adam Miller is Harden-lite, so I'd avoid him although his talent is undeniable. Chuck Lofgren (whowasn't mentioned above) looked good at the futures game, and reminds me a bit of Mulder, and could feasibly start the year in AAA. Trevor Crowe was orginially drafted by the A's, so to a degree we must covet him (his OBP numbers are nice in relation to his AVG). And A-cab is originally an SS, and his move to 2b was simply because of Pheralta, not because his glove was suspect.
From the indians perspective, they have a core of Blanton, Carmona, and Sabathia that they could keep for a long time. Borowski has a Santiago Casilla like knack for barely making it out of innings, and i think he's 62 years old. But if we wait too long and let them look at Jensen Lewis much longer, they might not think they need a closer. Lastly, it doesn't really devastate their system that much. They still keep Miller, and that kid Mills they drafted this year looks pretty good.
by sourstuff on Dec 16, 2007 4:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I agree 100%
The A's should package Street and Blanton together and sell it to Cleveland. I also like the deal you suggested.
Any 2 top 20 pitching prospects with Cabrera would satisfy me.
by brenarlo on Dec 16, 2007 4:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cabrera
What you say doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Isn't Peralta a pretty terrible defensive shortstop? Why wouldn't they switch the two? I feel like Cabrera's SS defense can't be as good as it's sometimes cracked up to be.
Two other things: a. Sabathia's gone after next season, and b. the last thing the A's need is more Mulder clones, having just picked up two or three of them (depending on your POV re: Eveland) from Arizona.
by PaulThomas on Dec 16, 2007 5:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
clarification
I wasn't commenting on what the Indians should do or will do with their MI. I was simply saying that ACab wasn't switched to 2b because he couldn't cut it at SS. Hence, he could usurp Crosby's position here. In fact Sickels, really likes Acab's glove.
Secondly, Shapiro hasn't ruled out not resigning CC. Anyway, the threat of his leaving is all the more reason to make a trade for Joe (as a contingency plan and for leverage). And considering that Brandon Morrow isn't going anywhere, that leaves Tony Butler and Chris Tillman. Both whom still need about 2-3 years. Of course I was also just having fun speaking in hypothetical.
Lastly, and this isn't directed at PT. We all need to get off Eveland. I mean, I pray he is the second coming. But guys that do well in the minors and eat it in the majors are called AAAA players. And there aren't many who can shake that title (I won't even say that Cust has successfully even done it yet either).
by sourstuff on Dec 16, 2007 5:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I know who I'd want from Seattle!
by Englishmajor on Dec 16, 2007 4:50 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Where on earth did you get your sig line?
It bloody rules.
by Philip Christy on Dec 16, 2007 9:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope Beane doesn't stop insisting on Jones
in this case I think Seattle is more desperate than Oakland...let them blink first.
by OaklandSi on Dec 16, 2007 5:09 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
The Mariners are over a barrel right now. They need to sign Silva AND trade for an SP to be competitive next year. They just renewed Horacio Ramirez's contract.
by PaulThomas on Dec 16, 2007 5:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Also agreed
Adam Jones is a great fit for us. The Mariners really want another solid starter, and if they miss out on Bedard, they'll be getting pretty desperate. They like Jones, but I think they'd blink and give in if that's what it takes. Maybe they ask for some other throw-ins to even out the trade, in which case I'm fine with that, so long as it's still a fair deal.
Strange to see on MLB Trade Rumors a lot of commenters are suggesting Blanton for Jones plus, whereas on Lookout Landing it's all Jones for Blanton plus. I'm with MikeA on this; I'd be happy with Jones for Blanton straight up.
All of this assumes that Bavasi and Beane really are negotiating on this, and it's not just some wild rumor. I'm still not convinced Bavasi will trade with the A's. I guess I'll believe it when I see it.
by iglew on Dec 16, 2007 10:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Mariners
Given how well Blanton has pitched against the Mariners on several occasions -- probably 2 of his best 3 overall performances against them -- I would have to think they would hold him to the relatively highest perceived value.
If we can get Jones, awesome.
Or if we can get Morrow (+?) I really like what I see from him. Definitely has some #2 starter potential imo.
The Mariners are never going to be a serious threat anyway, might as well give them whatever we have to -- assuming a nice prospect return of course. See the Ho-Ram re-signing. Talk about a sunk cost irrational GM.
by SwisherSweet on Dec 16, 2007 5:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Morrow lacks good secondary stuff
He's basically strictly a fastball pitcher. I'm not a fan of his at all. Especially the way the Mariners handle pitching prospects (basically, guarantee failure by rushing them).
Ramirez isn't a sunk cost, it's a cry for help.
by PaulThomas on Dec 16, 2007 11:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Forget Asdrubal Cabrera
Shapiro balked when Beane asked for him during the Haren sweepstakes. If we couldn't get Cabrera with Haren I seriously doubt Blanton would pull the trick.
And to be honest, if I'm Cleveland I'd rather sit on my depth then go after Blanton.
Mets seem like the best bet. They could lose Perez, Pedro and Hernandez to FA after the season. They don't really have a hot SS prospect but I think Jose Coronado looked worse then he really is. He should have been in High-A last year, not AA. I don't know why the Mets continue to rush their prospects through the minors.
by grover on Dec 16, 2007 5:45 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
what about
Reid Brignac of the devil rays then? They have already shown they are willing to trade young talent as long as they get young proven talent back (Garza for Delmon). And Troy Percival is closing for them now (if you figure Street could go there as well, that is), that is pretty brutal.
by sourstuff on Dec 16, 2007 5:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Doubtful
Rays are very high on Brignac, they've made a bunch of plans around him at SS by 2009. With Kazmir, Shields and Garza in the rotation plus more pitching help on the way I really don't see them needing Blanton at this time.
by grover on Dec 16, 2007 5:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i have to ask
Is there a decent SS prospect you think we could get? Dodgers look out of the question now with Kuroda, so it doesn't look like Hu is an option. Brandon Wood plays for the angels. I really doubt Triunfel is available. So what does prospect does that leave with a decent ceiling? Jed Lowrie, Elvis Andrus (but he plays for the Rangers), hell...Brent Lillbridge?
by sourstuff on Dec 16, 2007 6:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So what prospect does*
by sourstuff on Dec 16, 2007 6:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Lillibridge makes some sense
The Braves have two young MI they like and have been sniffing around for a closer type.
The problem is I don't see Beane folding on Crosby while he has 2 years guaranteed left. Lillibridge is 24, do you keep him in AAA for a year as you give Crosby yet another chance? Or do you go after someone who'll be in AA next year and won't be ready until 2009 at the earliest.
by grover on Dec 16, 2007 6:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I could see Street for Lillibridge
and it's an idea that's been thrown around a reasonable amount here previously. So if that trade went down...
I don't see why he couldn't start the year in AAA while Crosby is given one last shot at proving himself, and then:
- If Crosby can't hack it by mid-season, or gets hurt again, decide what to do with him and bring Lillibridge up for some MLB time at SS
- If Crosby does finally show himself to be decent offensively, stays healthy, and plays solid defense then either deal him right then and there and bring up Lillibridge to take that spot, or deal Ellis to somebody who needs a 2B or a better 2B before the deadline and bring Lillibridge up to play 2B with the idea that Crosby will stay at SS and Lillibridge at 2B going forward
There are tons of other alternatives too, that's just a couple ideas that occur to me this second. I don't really think the A's would mind having the problem of figuring out what to do with Lillibridge if they could get him and he was totally ready for the show.
by still bills kingdom on Dec 16, 2007 6:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
OT
Are you going to write a diary about the prospects the A's got in the Haren Deal?
by pickinmachine on Dec 16, 2007 5:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Crickey, why?!
I've covered them all on a couple different threads. I really don't think there would be much demand for another round of discussions.
Maybe after Blanton gets dealt I'll do something.
by grover on Dec 16, 2007 5:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
thats cool
It would just be nice to see a centralized diary about the prospects and projections for when you think they would see time with the A's. Plus you know quite a bit about minor leaguers, and always put in your honest, realistic opinion.
I'll do some searching though, things can get buried pretty quickly around here.
by pickinmachine on Dec 16, 2007 6:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
FYI
I am toying with doing a minor league themed diary, which would include a couple of the new guys in a more then passing way.
by grover on Dec 16, 2007 6:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That would be great
I always enjoy your diaries.
by kaweahkaweah on Dec 17, 2007 10:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you
by grover on Dec 17, 2007 3:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
and your
flowing blue locks
by flipgatey3 on Dec 17, 2007 10:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
re: Swisher
yes, he is locked up. Unless you are planning on the A's sucking for a good while we aren't necessarily trading Swish.
by SwisherSweet on Dec 16, 2007 6:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Harden
I think it would be foolish to move him this off-season while his value is so low and his health still a major concern. I'd look at him as a $4.5M project this year, the last guaranteed on his contract. If he is healthy, no doubt he'll put up sick numbers and be one hell of a chip for a team in contention. That team gets him for whatever portion of $4.5M is left and $7M for '09. In a pennant race, that should be worth gold. This off-season, an injury risk Harden probably wouldn't get enough return to worry about paying him $4.5M in '08, even if he flops. The '09 team option has no buyout, so it seems like a no-brainer to keep him and hope his value goes up during the '08 season.
by Eric in Atlanta on Dec 16, 2007 6:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
+1
makes sense to me. Well said, EiA.
by popcornjames on Dec 18, 2007 4:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't Trade Blanton
Blanton's three years have each contained one very bad stretch by Big Joe, and the rest of the time the guy's been close to unhittable, particularly the past two years. At some point, probably 2008, he won't have that bad stretch, and you'll see the real Joe Blanton over a full season.
If I was looking to trade him, I'd give him one more year with the A's. Those kind of bad stretches tend to disappear with maturity and I think you'll see a front of the rotation guy. Then, if Billy feels he still needs to rebuild, you pull a Mulder or Haren type trade for top prospects.
Also, if you check out this scenario, which isn't all that unlikely: Gaudin is fully recovered from his hip surgery, Blanton doesn't have that bad stretch, Duke makes the transition to starter, and Eveland is MLB ready --- then throw in the wild card: Harden stays healthy...then even with the Haren trade, the A's stay competitive. Once you trade Blanton, you can't even find a scenario where the A's don't finish last.
by richwol on Dec 16, 2007 6:29 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
As much
as I want to believe and agree with you, we need to throw away any hopes of a competitive season this year or we'll just have to wait another year until we're truly competitive again. Not committing fully to rebuilding will only result in a prolonged pain for us as fans.
by Helloooo 1st on Dec 16, 2007 8:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not saying Blanton should stay past a year...
Committing to a rebuilding process means waiting for the right time when value is highest. I think Blanton's value will be higher either at the trade deadline or during next year's off-season. Besides, this does give the A's a chance to compete. If all goes well, you don't trade him at all.
by richwol on Dec 17, 2007 10:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If you think that Blanton will improve
his numbers next season by a significant margin, this is a logical position to take. Two things, though: first, most people don't agree with you on his ultimate capabilities (consensus seems to be that last year was about what one would expect from him or maybe even a little better), and second, an A-ball prospect acquired next offseason is a year further away than an A-ball prospect acquired THIS offseason. Staggering a rebuild increases the amount of time necessary to carry it out. So even if the A's might be able to get more value qua value next fall, it still might be wise to make the move now to help ensure that the nucleus of young players holds together a bit better.
by PaulThomas on Dec 17, 2007 11:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or....
In a year, Beane can shoot for players who are a year closer to MLB-ready. Quality over quantity.
by richwol on Dec 17, 2007 1:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We need
by Helloooo 1st on Dec 17, 2007 3:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
mlb trade rumor site thinks that
the Reds might be in the thick of the Blanton sweepstakes, particularly if they're willing to offer Homer Bailey
by OaklandSi on Dec 16, 2007 8:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
That absolutely will not happen.
(for Bailey).
by mikeA on Dec 16, 2007 8:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bailey
If the Reds include Baily in a Blanton trade... I'd take it.
The Reds would never do it.
How about Votto and move Swish to RF?
LF - Buck
CF - Gonzalez
RF - Swisher
1B - Votto
DH - Barton
Would the Reds trade Votto for Blanton?
by brenarlo on Dec 16, 2007 8:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
swishh is already moved to RF
with cust at DH and barton at 1b, so you're moving barton. see THIS is why zonis needs to post the lineup five times a day...
by xbhaskarx on Dec 16, 2007 10:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
...why would you trade for Votto
instead of getting a player who's actually useful and keeping Cust?
It's not like Cust is exactly a player with high value who can be traded to fill a hole.
by PaulThomas on Dec 16, 2007 11:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i said nothing about trading for votto
by xbhaskarx on Dec 17, 2007 8:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the funny thing is
that non-A's fans seem to not want our pitchers. On sites like MLBTradeRumor, whenever an A's pitcher is brought up, Mets, Reds, Indians, Dodgers fans all rage with disgust over the thought of trading their prospects for A's pitchers.
I wonder why that is given that you see Haren and Blanton up there in most of the statistical categories for starters in the AL? Is it because we weren't very good this year? That doesn't explain why they salivate over Bedard. Is it the lack of 95mph fastball?
Just curious.
by jubjub on Dec 17, 2007 2:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Three Words
Hudson, Mulder, Zito
by Threepwood XX on Dec 17, 2007 3:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
wow. hadn't thought of that angle.
jubjub is right however, the message boards aren't as high on our pitchers as we might except them to be, given the stats, especially factoring in innings pitched.
So that's one answer, many good innings might be worth more than a smaller amount of flashy innings, but they don't give much latitude for dreamy projections.
But I like the other answer too: Mulder, Hudson, Zito all benefited from a favorable ballpark, a better than average pen most years, and a good but not flashy defense. They didn't do as well leaving the A's and the AL as they "should" have, thus the whole brand is affected.
It's kind of like the way that people would for years immediately discount any prospects that the Braves traded away. Or like the discounting of PCL stats for many teams' hitters.
by jakarta on Dec 17, 2007 10:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
re: richwol
I like your point about Blanton's bad stretches hurting his numbers, but is his stuff really good enough to believe that he isn't destined to have a rough patch every season? I don't think waiting necessarily hurts that much, especially since his value isn't tremendous and would still likely be good (if not better) next season.
Anyway, if we keep Blanton there is an outside shot that our rotation remains totally legitimate next season.
Healthy effective Duke
Healthy effective Harden
Healthy effective Meyer
etc etc...
by SwisherSweet on Dec 16, 2007 9:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, Okay
I'd agree with you if there were a link between a month-long rough patch and a pitcher's over all stuff. But I don't see a connection. I see a connection if a pitcher is inconsistent game to game, but Blanton isn't. When he's in a rhythm, he's terrific.
In any event, I doubt if we'll see any fall off in 2008 because his secondary stats in 1007 were far better than in 2006. So if he avoids the rough patch, his value goes up, way up, even though he's lost a year of contract value.
If I'm Beane, I wait.
by richwol on Dec 17, 2007 10:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm surprised the Giants aren't mentioned more...
they've gotta love a guy over a thousand years old.
...his secondary stats in 1007 were far better than in 2006.
by Scottbass on Dec 18, 2007 1:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Never gonna happen
Although i wish it would
by micdog2001 on Dec 17, 2007 4:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Trade him for Lastings Milledge
I just had to add that:)
by may7 on Dec 17, 2007 10:40 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
could happen
Mike Rizzo, former DBacks scouting director is now with the Nationals. Maybe there were one or two players in the DBacks system he saw and wanted, and the A's can make a deal.
by apilgrim on Dec 17, 2007 11:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think it would be stupid
To give the M's Blanton and Harden. Blanton kills the M's (divison rival, important) and harden could be great. i would trade one but not both.
by micdog2001 on Dec 17, 2007 12:18 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Also, DON'T TRADE SWISHER
It's one thing to trade a starting pitcher but a power hitter is way more fun to watch. A losing team is also WAY more fun to watch if you have a a guy like swish on the team. he's cool, talented, and charismatic.
by micdog2001 on Dec 17, 2007 12:21 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Blanton and Huston
for Homer and Hamilton (plus 2 Janish/Vaikkala-types)
Would that (a) get it done, (b) be good for the A's, (c) be good for the Reds?
by JJ on Dec 17, 2007 2:28 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Hamilton is apparently stretched in CF
... not to mention a recovering (and somewhat brittle injury-wise) drug addict, but even just evaluating last season in a vacuum, no, that's not enough. Cincinnati's offerings (outfielders and first basemen) don't match up well with Oakland's needs.
by PaulThomas on Dec 17, 2007 2:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cordero
I think the Reds will probably give Francisco Cordero a shot at the closer role before they trade off alot of young talent for another closer (Street).
by apilgrim on Dec 17, 2007 2:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
maybe...
i guess they would have 46 million reasons to try coco at closer
by flipgatey3 on Dec 17, 2007 10:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The last time I heard this much about trading
cupcakes I was in the third grade. I think I got a Baby Ruth in return...
by LAXile on Dec 17, 2007 2:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
meanwhile, everyone's trying to give away ...
... their juice boxes.
by monkeyball on Dec 17, 2007 3:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The More I Think About It...
the more I think Cincinnati might be the best place for Blanton. The NL Central is about as easily winnable a division as their is, and a steady hand like Blanton, even though he's not an ace-type, could make a huge difference in the standings, especially behind Cincy's potent offense. Blanton's got grounball-ish tendancies that would play well in that Launching Pad over there, is under club control for three seasons and is from the general region.
As for what Oakland could expect to get from the Reds for him, I disagree that their prospects don't match up well with Oakland's needs.
If the A's got either Homer Bailey or Johnny Cueto plus one or two of Janish/Valaika/Loo or Sean Watson it would be a great trade, even if the A's had to throw in another piece to make it work.
The A's don't need corner/1B/DH types like Votto or Hamilton, they need middle infielders and pitching prospects that are in the low-to-mid minors. Cincy has a couple of each that could suit Oakland's needs pretty nicely, especially Valaika and Cueto.
by Taj Adib on Dec 17, 2007 6:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
The Reds MI down the food chain?
Last time I checked out their farm I stayed AA and above.
by grover on Dec 17, 2007 6:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
supposedly the Reds wouldn't give up Cueto
for Haren, and might consider on giving up Bailey for Bedard...(according to MLB Trade Rumors)...if both of those are true, it doesn't sound like either would be available for Blanton (unless there's more coming from Oakland?)
by OaklandSi on Dec 17, 2007 6:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
am i the only one who doesnt like adam jones?
the man does not walk...hes a freak of an athlete but no patience to speak of, not the type we breed in this organization
by harendaman365 on Dec 17, 2007 6:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
His IsoOBP is not awful
His career minors line is a respectable, if unexceptional, .063.
Combine that with basically being the nut high in every other category...
by PaulThomas on Dec 17, 2007 7:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Non-poker players
are liable to misconstrue that last sentence.
Unless the expression, unbeknownst to me, has already seeped into general usage. In which case I'll recant my observation and resolve to leave the house more frequently.
by 74mk on Dec 17, 2007 7:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He is 21.
AT age 21, he put up a 314-382-586, 968 OPS line in AAA. He plays good defense in CF.
Yes, he could walk more, but many young players have that issue. Look at the walk rates of some other highly touted OFs like Carlos Gonzales, Delmon Young.
by rfloh on Dec 17, 2007 11:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, we all see how great our offense is with...
that high OBP too, don't we? Every roster needs some balance. I'll take a few hackers to go along with the high OBP guys.
by Miggy on Dec 18, 2007 7:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
