Who do we trade and what do we expect in return?

[Have a seat, Neifi]

I remember the rumored Brown / Soriano deal similar to N&G, i.e., that we offered something akin to a straight-up swap and that it was the Phillies (not us) that said no.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm pretty sure somebody reported the Cubs weren't interested in Brown.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm pretty sure somebody reported the Cubs weren't interested in Brown.

 

One of the PSD insiders.

[neely crenshaw]

Last year they were able to deal Reed Johnson and Jeff Baker for something. I think they could probably deal just about anyone.

I think anyone expiring will be dealt at some time. They will be more careful with control players looking to get as much as possible for them.

My main question is what will they do with starting pitching. They have been great at finding cheap effective starters the last 2 years. Right now there are many teams that have pitching problems, how many do we deal and who do we keep for the future?

I have to believe teams like the Yankees and Angels will come calling for Garza if he shows he is healthy.

For playing so poorly to start the season, we seem to have a lot of chips that contenders will be looking for, and there don't seem to be a lot of teams that will be sellers. As much as I'd hate another deep sell-off, there could be a big possibility of completely re-stocking our system.

[BeerHere]

Last year they were able to deal Reed Johnson and Jeff Baker for something. I think they could probably deal just about anyone.

I think anyone expiring will be dealt at some time. They will be more careful with control players looking to get as much as possible for them.

My main question is what will they do with starting pitching. They have been great at finding cheap effective starters the last 2 years. Right now there are many teams that have pitching problems, how many do we deal and who do we keep for the future?

I have to believe teams like the Yankees and Angels will come calling for Garza if he shows he is healthy.

For playing so poorly to start the season, we seem to have a lot of chips that contenders will be looking for, and there don't seem to be a lot of teams that will be sellers. As much as I'd hate another deep sell-off, there could be a big possibility of completely re-stocking our system.

I agree, there doesn't really seem to be a lot of teams that are going to sell. Garza, Barney, Soriano, Gregg, Dejesus, Feldman - I think these guys are all but gone. I'd bet that someone takes Marmol as well but that seems less certain and the return will be poor.

[toonsterwu]

Fundamentally, I believe everyone on this roster should be available. Realistically, that's not the case. That said, what do we have to trade? I look at this roster, in terms of trade assets, and the two things that come to mind are

 

a) Hey, a lot of movable parts ...

 

and

 

b) Which of these guys is really going to net ... an intriguing return?

 

There really aren't a lot of pieces that seem likely to net intriguing returns, for a variety of reasons (hence why I believe everyone should be available ... if someone offers you a stupid return because they are desperate, you should ponder it, partly because there really isn't much in the upper levels, and most of the somewhat intriguing guys in AA probably need to spend the full year in the minors).

 

Davell does a nice job breaking down the potential trade candidates.

 

Some thoughts -

 

- Everything comes with two caveats ... it only takes one team to really throw things out of whack (so injuries can change the game) ... and if someone's ridiculously hot, you never know.

 

- Navarro and Sweeney netting a Jeff Baker type return (Marcelo Carreno - an mildly intriguing A level asset)? Baker offered a team versatility and some righthanded pop. There's enough of an offensive book on Sweeney and Navarro. It's tough for me to envision them netting something like that. That said, I do agree that if anyone wants to give up anything for them ... you move along and get similar guys next offseason, as similar guys are always available.

 

- Feldman is a tough one to figure. If he's hot, you never know what a team will give up for pitching at the deadline, if they have a need. That said, if he comes down to earth a little bit, then he's an innings eater who will give you end of the rotation ability. Not bad ... but how much does a team give up for that. It reminds me of the Jarrod Washburn trade a few years ago (to the Tigers ... fully acknowledge not the best comp and all trades exist in their own environments). Washburn netted Luke French and Mauricio Robles, not the most exciting tandem. If we can get a Doug Fister type trade return, great, but if we simply get an intriguing raw asset that's several years away (Robles sort of falls in that broad category), I don't think I'd be disappointed. Not excited, but not disappointed if that's the end result.

 

- If DeJesus is hitting, I do feel like, on paper, it's probably the right time to move him, with an option that most teams should be able to live with. If he's hitting, I also think that expecting a borderline top 10 prospect for our system probably isn't, on paper, an unrealistic demand. That said, if his power falls off, I can't figure out which team would go hard after him, barring injuries. He's a corner OF, top of the order hitter. Not a ton of teams looking for that, so unless you squeeze him into CF, it's tough to figure out who. That said, a long way to go. (if there's a team I wonder about right now as a fit, it'd be the Indians ... seems like he could be a nice piece to slide into the 2 hole to move Kipnis down the lineup a bit).

 

- Hairston for a couple guys in our top 20? Don't see that. Keeping Hairston around? I can buy that. Everything depends on whether or not he can pick it up hitting wise.

 

- I'm a firm believer that any and all pen arms should be considered. Now, Fujikawa probably won't be moved, but everyone else should be considered. There's simply no point in having James Russell hanging around at a high cost if you can likely net a good return for him. If Russell doesn't fall off tremendously (if he simply becomes closer to the pitcher he was last year, that's fine), he should be able to net you a pretty good return at the deadline. Yeah, he's got a few more years of control, but if he's at a peak and has years of control, that should be able to help us in getting a quality return (Atlanta screams out as a possible fit). If anyone wants Marmol, move on.

 

- I think we're in no man's land with Garza. I hope he gets on such a roll that we move out of no man's land with him, but it seems far more likely that he won't pitch well enough to net a big return, and it'll be tough to find a fit for an extension. I guess I could envision a team potentially offering a Rich Harden type return (Gallagher/Murton/Patterson/Donaldson for those that forgot ... easy to forget that Gallagher was a very intriguing asset then), and I think I'd probably be okay with that versus an extension. This is a tough one for the FO. If Garza would agree to some club options/triggers on the back end of a multi-year deal (not 5, though), I'd be fine if they went that route.

 

- I think you move Schierholtz if anyone offers anything interesting. That's a very broad parameter to set, but look, if you can get a Todd Walker type return on Schierholtz (Jose Ceda, basically, a gamble on a raw upside arm), then I think you pull the trigger. He's a platoon guy who could be a cheap way to fill the OF for 2014, so if there's nothing interesting (and the way he's tailed off a bit makes it debatable), you keep him around.

 

I think our best trade asset, the one that might garner the most market interest, is James Russell, and I think he should net a good return. There's obviously no rush to move him, so if an injury happens/performance declines dramatically, you hold onto him, but if a good return is there, I think you pull the trigger. The Braves injuries makes me wonder if we could pry, say, a JR Graham or Alex Wood to headline a deal, and it's something I'd definitely consider. It's nice to keep solid guys with team control around, particularly guys that came up the system, but Russell could be the type that nets you a good piece for 2014, perhaps giving the FO some flexibility in the way they spend their money in the winter.

[neely crenshaw]

Depending on need, we could see a Marshall like deal for Russell.

Also I think Garza will have a strong market. We have many pitching options to trade but I think teams like the Angels and Yanks will want a front end guy, and even some others like Cleveland, Baltimore or even Tampa might go for him because it will only cost them for 6-8 weeks.

The angels top prospect is a 3b, they also have lots of lower level (younger) pitching prospects.

[davell]

Wow, if we could pull off Graham or Wood for Russell, I'd be thrilled.

[toonsterwu]

I'd be thrilled too. To be clear, I wasn't trying to suggest that was possible or realistic (although ... I don't think it's unrealistic ... a high level pen arm under control for uh ... 3 more years? ... in his prime, filling a major need for them should net us something of value ... I don't think Graham or Alex Wood are, say, top 50 prospects as of now, so one of them doesn't seem ... ludicrous ... and Frank Wren has shown that he's willing to move prospects to fill holes).

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I know I'm pounding the optimism very hard, but I think an interesting question is in what scenarios do you not do a firesale?

 

How late do you wait?

What would the line be? Based on record, games back, number of teams in front of you?

[davell]

Why does record factor in at all? If there are 5 teams that are 10 games up on us, I wouldn't care if we were 70-30, I'd still sell off parts that aren't longterm fixtures. Because you're not making the playoffs.

 

I'll cop out on the number of teams ahead of us somewhat. If we're 5 back, but in 11th place in the NL, I'm selling. If we're 5 back, but in 6th place, my answer may change. But I'm trying to project performance out for the rest of the year, looking at the health of each team, and looking at how many games they're playing against other contenders as well.

 

As for when? My guess is we're already getting plenty of interest, albeit varying degrees. If someone offers us a top 100 prospect for DeJesus tomorrow? I'm trading him now personally. Because the price very likely would lessen the further along we get and I don't see us getting close enough to buy. That being said, in the real world, I doubt many teams are making firm offers right now. So that gives us more time to watch things unfold.

 

Would it be disheartening for the vast majority of fans if we look up on July 1st and see ourselves 2 under .500, 7 back of the 2nd WC, and we trade Garza to Boston for Webster and Ranaudo or Barnes? Hell, I'm not even sure how this board would feel. I'd be very happy, because I don't look at our odds as being remotely good enough to warrant standing pat for a few more weeks. Only to see us 10 back 3 days before the deadline with Garza on the DL. Garza's a bad example in this, since I'd be perfectly happy to extend him as well, but use anyone else that we kind of suspect would be traded instead.

[SouthSideRyan]

If you think you'll get a lesser return 3 weeks later that's one thing, but trading a guy because he might tear his labrum over his next 4 starts is lame.

[davell]

Nah, its just an example of what could happen. I knew I shouldn't have used Garza. But if we got a very solid offer for DeJesus, Gregg, Feldman in the next few weeks, I'm selling. Honestky, I guess I want to see Garza pitch more before making a decision on him.

[Guest]

btw - Every bit of Feldman's performance is sustainable except for the babip. But even giving him a league average bump there still leaves him as a very good pitcher.

 

I'd rather have him extended than Garza right now. He'll be cheaper and likely better.

[Guest]

btw - Every bit of Feldman's performance is sustainable except for the babip. But even giving him a league average bump there still leaves him as a very good pitcher.

 

I'd rather have him extended than Garza right now. He'll be cheaper and likely better.

 

I'm riding high enough on the success of individual players this year that I trust Theo and Jed to fill in both of them.

[RammyFanny]

It depends on the return really. If all someone is offering is the next Christian Villanueva for a guy like Feldman, I think i'd rather just hold onto him and hope we strike lightning (assuming we aren't like 15 back in the WC). I don't want to have a fire sale just for the sake of having one. And i'd wait as long as possible before determining this, because I doubt teams are going to offer their best packages when all other options are still on the table, even when it means getting a few extra starts from 1 year deal guys.

[sneakypower]

btw - Every bit of Feldman's performance is sustainable except for the babip. But even giving him a league average bump there still leaves him as a very good pitcher.

 

I'd rather have him extended than Garza right now. He'll be cheaper and likely better.

our starters collectively have the best team BABIP in baseball right now, at .263, so Feldman's .254 figure doesn't seem super crazy given his GB tendencies and our superlative IF defense:

 

past 2 seasons

Rizzo - 3rd-best UZR/150 (qualified): +11

Barney - best UZR/150 (qualified): +14

Valbuena - 2nd-best UZR/150 (min 800 inn): +24 (!)

 

and Castro has gradually improved his problems with errors and may develop into a plus as well, from the average fielder he is now

 

suffice it to say, it's a favorable setup for pitchers and if we can capitalize on a pitcher's (defense-aided) success by getting another team to overpay, i'm all for it (Shark, maybe Garza aside)

[Guest]

btw - Every bit of Feldman's performance is sustainable except for the babip. But even giving him a league average bump there still leaves him as a very good pitcher.

 

I'd rather have him extended than Garza right now. He'll be cheaper and likely better.

our starters collectively have the best team BABIP in baseball right now, at .263, so Feldman's .254 figure doesn't seem super crazy given his GB tendencies and our superlative IF defense:

 

past 2 seasons

Rizzo - 3rd-best UZR/150 (qualified): +11

Barney - best UZR/150 (qualified): +14

Valbuena - 2nd-best UZR/150 (min 800 inn): +24 (!)

 

and Castro has gradually improved his problems with errors and may develop into a plus as well, from the average fielder he is now

 

suffice it to say, it's a favorable setup for pitchers and if we can capitalize on a pitcher's (defense-aided) success by getting another team to overpay, i'm all for it (Shark, maybe Garza aside)

Honestly, what makes you feel Garza is a better asset than Feldman?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

My problem is that I just feel like it's wrong to firesale on a team that is .500 or better, even if they are a dozen games out of a playoff spot. I can't come up with a great reason. The best I've got is something vague about "winning culture" and respect for your players, or maybe attractiveness to free agents (I think our record hurt us with Sanchez and Grilli this year).

[davell]

We were looking to add a single player last year that could have been construed as a longterm piece. And in both those instances, the player stayed with his original team and with offers extremely close or the same. When the Marlins went on a spending spree, they were able to get players. Can't see why we'd be any different.

 

Not to mention, I really don't see us doing that type of thing anyway. If we have Rizzo, Castro, Shark, E-Jax, Wood, Barney and a few role players left over after the selloff(maybe Garza as well) it won't be that hard to convince players we're on the way up. Especially if we trade for an impact player early on during the offseason.

 

The real silver lining to your fear though, is that the FA class sucks anyway. I can't see Ellsbury not being reunited with this group and Choo is a Boras guy, so he'll follow the cash. I'm pretty confident we'll get one of them. And I figure we'll either have Garza or Suk Min Yoon or the Japanese dude(Tanaka?) that may get posted. We'll be fine. I'm not worried about FA not wanting to be here. Agents are smart enough to know Theo's going to get things done here.

[toonsterwu]

btw - Every bit of Feldman's performance is sustainable except for the babip. But even giving him a league average bump there still leaves him as a very good pitcher.

 

I'd rather have him extended than Garza right now. He'll be cheaper and likely better.

our starters collectively have the best team BABIP in baseball right now, at .263, so Feldman's .254 figure doesn't seem super crazy given his GB tendencies and our superlative IF defense:

 

past 2 seasons

Rizzo - 3rd-best UZR/150 (qualified): +11

Barney - best UZR/150 (qualified): +14

Valbuena - 2nd-best UZR/150 (min 800 inn): +24 (!)

 

and Castro has gradually improved his problems with errors and may develop into a plus as well, from the average fielder he is now

 

suffice it to say, it's a favorable setup for pitchers and if we can capitalize on a pitcher's (defense-aided) success by getting another team to overpay, i'm all for it (Shark, maybe Garza aside)

Honestly, what makes you feel Garza is a better asset than Feldman?

 

It does depend on how Garza and Feldman are pitching at that point, but I'd argue that, if both are going strong, Garza would likely be the more attractive asset because

 

a) Better overall stuff

 

b) better track record of getting swings and misses

 

and

 

b) While I don't agree with it, there is this notion that the AL East is a tougher place to pitch, and that a guy who has had success there is likely to be coveted by, at the very least, those teams in the division (with a need for pitching). We know that the Yankees believe in this a bit, based on some of their FA moves/decisions/regrets of the past.

 

This isn't to say Feldman's a bad asset, and if continues at his current pace, he could net us a very solid return (or as you note, be resigned for multiple years). He just doesn't have a track record of success as a starter (really, he's only taken off in the last year).

 

But that's my guess, and again, have to wait and see how they are doing to really know.

[A New Era]

I'm pretty sure somebody reported the Cubs weren't interested in Brown.

 

One of the PSD insiders.

 

I remember that, and I didn't know much about Brown but I knew enough I was really interested to trade Soriano for a younger guy with risks but great upside.

 

So file that under "missed trade opportunity # 2" for this FO? (#1 being Chase Headley for cheap)

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm not ready to regret missing out on Brown just yet. All his peripherals are the same except for he's suddenly almost tripled his HR/FB%. Maybe that's legit, maybe not.

[Guest]

That post confused me since I looked at Brown's line earlier this week and saw he was basically identical to Soriano. Apparently he's gone 8 for 20 with 6 HR since then, yikes.

[Guest]

I'm pretty sure somebody reported the Cubs weren't interested in Brown.

 

One of the PSD insiders.

 

I remember that, and I didn't know much about Brown but I knew enough I was really interested to trade Soriano for a younger guy with risks but great upside.

 

So file that under "missed trade opportunity # 2" for this FO? (#1 being Chase Headley for cheap)

 

What was the story on this Chase Headley for cheap that I apparently missed?