Re: How about a deal with the Rockies

[Backtobanks]

From Ken Rosenthal @ Foxsports:

 

The Rockies cannot give away third baseman Garrett Atkins. They are likely to keep first baseman Todd Helton. But right-hander Jason Marquis, closer Huston Street and outfielders Brad Hawpe and Ryan Spilborghs are among the players who could get moved.

 

Instead of a deal centering on Atkins, how about going after Huston Street with Atkins as a throw-in. Since both have big contracts (Street - $4 million and Atkins $7 million), maybe we can dump a little bit of salary their way.

 

Miles, Heilman, and a decent pitching prospect for Street and Atkins. The Rockies save about $3.5 million and get a reserve IF and 2 pitchers. Hopefully Atkins can perk up some until Ramirez gets back and Street can get into the 7th/8th/9th inning mix.

[nolanwood]

Atkins hasn't been THAT bad and Street has more worth than that...but I guess if they are giving Atkins away that would definitely fit the profile. If I was the GM of the Rockies I would want to improve my team now or in the future - Heilman and Miles do neither.

[jersey cubs fan]

Atkins hasn't been THAT bad

 

Yes he has.

.189/.271/.300 for an OPS+ of 47.

[dew1679666265]

Atkins hasn't been THAT bad and Street has more worth than that...but I guess if they are giving Atkins away that would definitely fit the profile. If I was the GM of the Rockies I would want to improve my team now or in the future - Heilman and Miles do neither.

 

Yeah, I'd think they'd want prospects who could help them in the future as opposed to swapping veterans for veterans.

[jersey cubs fan]

Atkins hasn't been THAT bad and Street has more worth than that...but I guess if they are giving Atkins away that would definitely fit the profile. If I was the GM of the Rockies I would want to improve my team now or in the future - Heilman and Miles do neither.

 

Yeah, I'd think they'd want prospects who could help them in the future as opposed to swapping veterans for veterans.

 

I'd think they'd be interested in cutting some costs, and getting prospects, which is is what the original post already noted.

[dew1679666265]

Atkins hasn't been THAT bad and Street has more worth than that...but I guess if they are giving Atkins away that would definitely fit the profile. If I was the GM of the Rockies I would want to improve my team now or in the future - Heilman and Miles do neither.

 

Yeah, I'd think they'd want prospects who could help them in the future as opposed to swapping veterans for veterans.

 

I'd think they'd be interested in cutting some costs, and getting prospects, which is is what the original post already noted.

 

They're cutting $3.5 million this year maybe, but instead of having two expiring contracts (Street and Atkins) they would get one expiring contract (Heilman) and one contract that extends through next year (Miles).

 

I haven't heard that the Rockies have to cut payroll this year, so wouldn't it make sense that they wouldn't want a bad veteran who is signed for a year longer than the guys they're trying to get rid of?

 

Maybe Heilman and two prospects for Atkins and Street would work better.

[nolanwood]

Atkins hasn't been THAT bad and Street has more worth than that...but I guess if they are giving Atkins away that would definitely fit the profile. If I was the GM of the Rockies I would want to improve my team now or in the future - Heilman and Miles do neither.

 

Yeah, I'd think they'd want prospects who could help them in the future as opposed to swapping veterans for veterans.

 

I'd think they'd be interested in cutting some costs, and getting prospects, which is is what the original post already noted.

 

 

Actually it was a single prospect and our garbage. Heilman and a couple quality prospects (as you mentioned) makes A LOT more sense.

[jersey cubs fan]

Atkins hasn't been THAT bad and Street has more worth than that...but I guess if they are giving Atkins away that would definitely fit the profile. If I was the GM of the Rockies I would want to improve my team now or in the future - Heilman and Miles do neither.

 

Yeah, I'd think they'd want prospects who could help them in the future as opposed to swapping veterans for veterans.

 

I'd think they'd be interested in cutting some costs, and getting prospects, which is is what the original post already noted.

 

 

Actually it was a single prospect and our garbage.

 

So it wasn't swapping veterans for veterans. It was some of their garbage, for some of our garbage, swapping out relievers with reasonably decent careers so far, with them saving money and getting a prospect. Maybe throw in another prospect if you insist.

[CubColtPacer]

Atkins hasn't been THAT bad and Street has more worth than that...but I guess if they are giving Atkins away that would definitely fit the profile. If I was the GM of the Rockies I would want to improve my team now or in the future - Heilman and Miles do neither.

 

Yeah, I'd think they'd want prospects who could help them in the future as opposed to swapping veterans for veterans.

 

I'd think they'd be interested in cutting some costs, and getting prospects, which is is what the original post already noted.

 

 

Actually it was a single prospect and our garbage.

 

So it wasn't swapping veterans for veterans. It was some of their garbage, for some of our garbage, swapping out relievers with reasonably decent careers so far, with them saving money and getting a prospect. Maybe throw in another prospect if you insist.

 

The problem is that they can get some decent value for Street in a trade. They don't need to just dump him. They'll probably have 5-6 teams knocking on their door looking for another good reliever at midseason. And if some contender's closer goes down or is ineffective, they could most likely get a steal for a guy like that.

 

So even if those two prospects are a good enough haul for Street (and a decent pitching prospect and a throw in prospect are not going to do it) that still leaves you with Atkins for Heilman and Miles. The analysis of that trade?

 

Getting rid of Atkins saves the Rockies about 4.7 million as of today. Heilman would be due about 1.08 million and Miles about 1.47 million. Then you add in Miles's 2.7 million next year, and that makes this part of the trade a salary swap of 4.7 million this year for 2.55 this year and 2.7 next year. The money is a wash.

 

So they aren't really dumping salary (because Street can always be traded to another team for value) and they aren't getting nearly enough value for Street. Plus now they have Miles already putting a small dent in next year's budget, and the Rockies have less room to pay utility players that then the Cubs do.

 

I see no reason why the Rockies would consider that deal.

[nolanwood]

The problem is that they can get some decent value for Street in a trade. They don't need to just dump him. They'll probably have 5-6 teams knocking on their door looking for another good reliever at midseason. And if some contender's closer goes down or is ineffective, they could most likely get a steal for a guy like that.

 

So even if those two prospects are a good enough haul for Street (and a decent pitching prospect and a throw in prospect are not going to do it) that still leaves you with Atkins for Heilman and Miles. The analysis of that trade?

 

Getting rid of Atkins saves the Rockies about 4.7 million as of today. Heilman would be due about 1.08 million and Miles about 1.47 million. Then you add in Miles's 2.7 million next year, and that makes this part of the trade a salary swap of 4.7 million this year for 2.55 this year and 2.7 next year. The money is a wash.

 

So they aren't really dumping salary (because Street can always be traded to another team for value) and they aren't getting nearly enough value for Street. Plus now they have Miles already putting a small dent in next year's budget, and the Rockies have less room to pay utility players that then the Cubs do.

 

I see no reason why the Rockies would consider that deal.

 

That's exactly where I was going - I was looking up the contracts of each player as you posted this.

 

Don't get me wrong, though... I'm 110% on the bandwagon for trying to get Street from the Rockies with Atkins as a throw in.

[Backtobanks]

Yeah, I'd think they'd want prospects who could help them in the future as opposed to swapping veterans for veterans.

 

I'd think they'd be interested in cutting some costs, and getting prospects, which is is what the original post already noted.

 

 

Actually it was a single prospect and our garbage.

 

So it wasn't swapping veterans for veterans. It was some of their garbage, for some of our garbage, swapping out relievers with reasonably decent careers so far, with them saving money and getting a prospect. Maybe throw in another prospect if you insist.

 

The problem is that they can get some decent value for Street in a trade. They don't need to just dump him. They'll probably have 5-6 teams knocking on their door looking for another good reliever at midseason. And if some contender's closer goes down or is ineffective, they could most likely get a steal for a guy like that.

 

So even if those two prospects are a good enough haul for Street (and a decent pitching prospect and a throw in prospect are not going to do it) that still leaves you with Atkins for Heilman and Miles. The analysis of that trade?

 

Getting rid of Atkins saves the Rockies about 4.7 million as of today. Heilman would be due about 1.08 million and Miles about 1.47 million. Then you add in Miles's 2.7 million next year, and that makes this part of the trade a salary swap of 4.7 million this year for 2.55 this year and 2.7 next year. The money is a wash.

 

So they aren't really dumping salary (because Street can always be traded to another team for value) and they aren't getting nearly enough value for Street. Plus now they have Miles already putting a small dent in next year's budget, and the Rockies have less room to pay utility players that then the Cubs do.

 

I see no reason why the Rockies would consider that deal.

 

So according to your numbers, Miles for Atkins saves the Rockies $.5 million salary (plus they have Miles as a reserve IF for 2010). That leaves Heilman plus a prospect for Street (and the Rockies saving > $1 million). I'm not sure what other teams would be offering for Street at the trade deadline, but I would imagine it wouldn't be more than one good prospect plus a mid-level prospect. I think it's a pretty reasonable trade for the Rockies.

[Clem Fandango]

I wish we needed a permanent right fielder because I'd kill for Brad Hawpe. He's probably the only Rockie in history to not have extreme home road splits. With the exception of some averages that aren't too drastic, almost all of his production numbers are eerily similar on the road as they are at home.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?n1=hawpebr01&year=Career&t=b#plato

[dew1679666265]

So according to your numbers, Miles for Atkins saves the Rockies $.5 million salary (plus they have Miles as a reserve IF for 2010). That leaves Heilman plus a prospect for Street (and the Rockies saving > $1 million). I'm not sure what other teams would be offering for Street at the trade deadline, but I would imagine it wouldn't be more than one good prospect plus a mid-level prospect. I think it's a pretty reasonable trade for the Rockies.

 

Heilman does not equate to a good prospect. If you had brought up Marshall/mid-level prospect for Street, that would equate more to a good and decent prospect. We'd be giving too much up, though.

 

Whatever interest Heilman might garner, it'd be to a contender who thinks he can pitch well for them down the stretch. Not a team building for next year and beyond - unless they dump a multi-year deal on us to get his expiring contract.

[Tracer Bullet]

Atkins hasn't been THAT bad and Street has more worth than that...but I guess if they are giving Atkins away that would definitely fit the profile. If I was the GM of the Rockies I would want to improve my team now or in the future - Heilman and Miles do neither.

 

Yeah, I'd think they'd want prospects who could help them in the future as opposed to swapping veterans for veterans.

 

I'd think they'd be interested in cutting some costs, and getting prospects, which is is what the original post already noted.

 

 

Actually it was a single prospect and our garbage.

 

So it wasn't swapping veterans for veterans. It was some of their garbage, for some of our garbage, swapping out relievers with reasonably decent careers so far, with them saving money and getting a prospect. Maybe throw in another prospect if you insist.

 

come on - the originally proposed deal was just terrible. It wasn't garbage for garbage. Atkins has been brutal for 2 months, but Street has been very good. You don't just give away closers with good numbers in the last year of their contract for Miles and Heilman.

[Backtobanks]

Actually it was a single prospect and our garbage.

 

So it wasn't swapping veterans for veterans. It was some of their garbage, for some of our garbage, swapping out relievers with reasonably decent careers so far, with them saving money and getting a prospect. Maybe throw in another prospect if you insist.

 

come on - the originally proposed deal was just terrible. It wasn't garbage for garbage. Atkins has been brutal for 2 months, but Street has been very good. You don't just give away closers with good numbers in the last year of their contract for Miles and Heilman.

 

My original post suggested Miles, Heilman, and a decent prospect. Other posters have suggested adding a second prospect. If you think you're going to get better than 2 prospects, a reserve IF, and a ML reliever from another team for a very good reliever and a brutal hitter with a terrible contract at the trade deadline, you're crazy. They might get 1 good prospect and 1 decent prospect for Street and still be stuck with Atkins and his $7 million contract.

[Tracer Bullet]

The point isn't whether you're giving them a prospect or not, it's having them take on Heilman and Miles. Maybe they take Heilman, but what would the Rockies want with Aaron Miles?

[Backtobanks]

The point isn't whether you're giving them a prospect or not, it's having them take on Heilman and Miles. Maybe they take Heilman, but what would the Rockies want with Aaron Miles?

 

Taking Miles would be their punishment for giving us Atkins and his contract. =D>

[Tyrant]

Vitters for Marquis. NL leader in wins, baby.

[biittner77]

Salary dump deals work in 1 or 2 ways. The dumping team pays none of the salary and they get bleh prospects or they pay some of the salary for good prospects. Sometimes a veteran has to be involved if they do not have a replacement for that player waiting in the wings.

 

Since the Rockies are looking to unload Atkins, I'm guessing they have an in house replacement for him. Thus they don't want any veterans. They would probably take a veteran pitcher however to replace Street.

 

Marmol and Gregg for Street and Atkins. That saves the Rockies money, gets them value for Street and they can always flip "proven closer" Gregg at the deadline.

[Backtobanks]

Salary dump deals work in 1 or 2 ways. The dumping team pays none of the salary and they get bleh prospects or they pay some of the salary for good prospects. Sometimes a veteran has to be involved if they do not have a replacement for that player waiting in the wings.

 

Since the Rockies are looking to unload Atkins, I'm guessing they have an in house replacement for him. Thus they don't want any veterans. They would probably take a veteran pitcher however to replace Street.

 

Marmol and Gregg for Street and Atkins. That saves the Rockies money, gets them value for Street and they can always flip "proven closer" Gregg at the deadline.

 

As I've tried to point out, Atkins has negative trade value, so I don't understand why we're increasing the package to get a few months of Street and a sub-.200 hitter with a ridiculous contract.

[dew1679666265]

Salary dump deals work in 1 or 2 ways. The dumping team pays none of the salary and they get bleh prospects or they pay some of the salary for good prospects. Sometimes a veteran has to be involved if they do not have a replacement for that player waiting in the wings.

 

Since the Rockies are looking to unload Atkins, I'm guessing they have an in house replacement for him. Thus they don't want any veterans. They would probably take a veteran pitcher however to replace Street.

 

Marmol and Gregg for Street and Atkins. That saves the Rockies money, gets them value for Street and they can always flip "proven closer" Gregg at the deadline.

 

As I've tried to point out, Atkins has negative trade value, so I don't understand why we're increasing the package to get a few months of Street and a sub-.200 hitter with a ridiculous contract.

 

If they don't get anything for Atkins, why would they trade him? If they take on Heilman and Miles, they'll save far less money than they'd like, plus they'll have a bad reserve IF taking some of next year's money.

[biittner77]

Street has a lot of value. Atkins has practically no value but there is no chance at all that they are going to take significantly less for Street just to get rid of Atkins. If you want Street in the deal the Rockies have to get more than veterans that won't save them any money or dubious "prospects".

 

Atkins could probably be had for somebody like Ryan Harvey (if he hadn't already been released) but Hendry doesn't want to/ can't take on any more payroll or he's plain not i9nterested in Atkins.

[JonJayCutler]

I wish we needed a permanent right fielder because I'd kill for Brad Hawpe.

 

We do need one lol.

[Backtobanks]

Street has a lot of value. Atkins has practically no value but there is no chance at all that they are going to take significantly less for Street just to get rid of Atkins. If you want Street in the deal the Rockies have to get more than veterans that won't save them any money or dubious "prospects".

 

Atkins could probably be had for somebody like Ryan Harvey (if he hadn't already been released) but Hendry doesn't want to/ can't take on any more payroll or he's plain not i9nterested in Atkins.

 

I repeat what I said earlier, at the trade deadline Street will get a good prospect and a mid-level prospect at best. (Remember, you're only getting a few months of Street.) So you're telling me that we trade a good prospect (Ascanio), a mid-level prospect, and Ryan Harvey for Street and Atkins? I'll take that deal.

[Tracer Bullet]

Is Street still arbitration eligible or is he a FA after this year? Cot's says he's only signed to avoid arbitration twice. Doesn't that mean he has 1 more arbitration year left? Or am I reading that wrong?

 

ETA - google search suggests he's a FA after 2010. So Street's worth even more to his new team.