toonsterwu

You know, I really don't have an issue if Bryant is #1 (leaving aside the usual note that rankings really are more for discussion purposes than anything else). He has a key enough issue that is apparent enough that I can buy a case for Buxton if you assume he comes back without any concerns. I can even buy a case for Russell. (Lindor, I absolutely have an issue with, while Correa just seems a step enough behind Russell that it would be hard to justify for me). In saying all that, I do think Bryant is #1 (Buxton wasn't lighting it up pre-injury, IIRC ... what was it, concussion? ... and Russell had enough areas of concern after the trade that it'd be hard to jump him over Bryant). I just don't have a huge issue that some feel otherwise (I mean ... the Buxton of last year ... if he continued progressing on that route and slowly started tapping into his power more ... that would've been a monster of a prospect in a year or two).

If he's getting "Zobrist'd", and being a "super-util" starter/a guy getting regular time, basically a guy who is going to get a dabble at 2nd, a touch in CF, maybe LF, heck 3rd (still find that odd), and shortstop, then okay, moving him wouldn't make a ton of sense (although I still have my doubts about his bat ... and I've liked how he has produced since his breakout A+ campaign in Daytona). If that's the case, okay. If he's a more a traditional util guy, a spot starter that gives you flexibility during games, then I wouldn't love it as much.

If he's getting "Zobrist'd", and being a "super-util" starter/a guy getting regular time, basically a guy who is going to get a dabble at 2nd, a touch in CF, maybe LF, heck 3rd (still find that odd), and shortstop, then okay, moving him wouldn't make a ton of sense (although I still have my doubts about his bat ... and I've liked how he has produced since his breakout A+ campaign in Daytona). If that's the case, okay. If he's a more a traditional util guy, a spot starter that gives you flexibility during games, then I wouldn't love it as much.

Let me phrase it another way - I think if a good, sensible deal came along, I'd be surprised if they didn't pursue it. Alcantara as a super-util guy makes some sense (although I still am a bit curious about this 3rd base thing ... don't recall reports of him working on it), but Alcantara would seem like the type of guy, right now, that might generate better value in a trade than the value he would provide as a super-util guy. I mean, solid super-util guys can be found (I mean, Luis Valbuena and Adrian Cardenas were essentially picked up to replace Ryan Flaherty and DJ LeMahieu (after the signing of Jeff Bianchi to take that upper level super-util role ... the only Theo/Jed move that sort of pissed me off ... but they got lucky and picked up Valbuena/Cardenas later). Total side note, but it's interesting to me how only 2 of those guys became useful major league assets, with the other two, the low power guys, not sticking).

I think it's a bit more complex than that. It seems clear they are trying to deal with their impending post-2015 FA situation sooner than later. They are clearly going for it now, but they are also trying to stabilize things so they don't fall into a Phillies-like hole. Furthermore, with Strasburg/Zimmerman, they will probably want immediate impact, or impact potential. I have nothing to base it on, but my hunch, along with other people's speculation out there, is that they would love to get an impact middle infielder now, to give them the flexibility to move Desmond for long term pieces, but saying that, Rizzo also made a move for long range assets in Trea Turner and Joe Ross, as the deal made too much sense for them to turn down. i think Rizzo is probably okay going into Desmond's final year if he gets a better deal that doesn't address the middle infield, though. Anyhow, all guesses and speculation. Still ... the Scherzer to Nats speculation happened awhile back (I think it was Jim Bowden who first mentioned it ... and he was the previous GM) and it eventually came true, so with the Desmond speculation out there, it makes me think that, at least for the Nats, something else may happen.

I would in a heartbeat. Now, I've been on the record that, while I loved Alcantara rankings wise coming up, I never really loved him as a pro (I think my posts on that are still in the minor league forum). I just wondered about his bat at the pro level, even though his K/BB numbers were never horrid. That said, my gut feeling is that there is no chance in hell that the Nationals would even consider that for Zimmerman (let's use Neil Ramirez as the reliever for the moment, just for discussion). As a side note, they've got zero need for Hendricks at the bigs, even if they trade a starter, so his value probably is minimal to them anyways. The problem is, even in Zimmerman's final year, I think they'll at least try to get impact potential in return (I mean ... Mike Rizzo has not made many bad deals in regards to trades ... hard to see him getting snookered by Theo/Jed). Beyond that, they've got options at 2nd/CF that are on the 40/close to the bigs (Wilmer Difo/Brian Goodwin/Michael Taylor), and they just added Trea Turner in some role. Just not sure if I buy Alcantara as a lead piece in a deal for Zimmerman. My guess is that it would be too complex for the two sides to work out a deal, as the fault lines/issues are fairly clear (at least, on Zimmerman/Strasburg). It's hard to see them giving up Zimmerman/Strasburg when, by all indications they don't HAVE to, unless they get impact now (giving them the flexibility to deal Ian Desmond for prospects) or high impact potential, and in the case of Zimmerman, it's hard to see the Cubs agreeing to give up multiple good pieces for 1 year of him. It'd probably take something like granting the Cubs a window of negotiation with Zimmerman, plus a prospect or two from the Nats, for something to really make sense for both sides, and the more complex things get, the more unrealistic it probably is. Edit: Looking at the Nationals prospects, it's pretty impressive how they've graduated guys and still have a top group of guys in the system that have really high potential. Granted, they've taken risks, and it's more arms than bats right now, but that's a fairly damn nice group of arms at the top, with some solid positional pieces.

The Fowler trade really just has me wondering if they are setting up another deal. I find it hard to imagine they would really use Alcantara as a super-util guy if they can get some solid value out of him (or use him at 3rd ... I've followed Alcantara up the ladder and I don't recall much, if any, time that he got at 3rd ... it was SS/2nd/CF up the ladder). It seems fairly clear they don't love him in CF (although I didn't think he was that horrid that it seemed impossible that he couldn't get better ... ). His experience at multiple positions makes him an interesting candidate for a number of teams, and I keep wondering about the Nats (where he could get time at 2nd/CF). Still, the fact that Zimmerman/Fister are impending FA's would make any deal tough and complex to figure out. A Strasburg deal is simply too complex for me to think that we could legitimately do.

Would really love for the Cubs to be in on Zimm. I hope so too. We really matchup well with their needs - we can fork over a late inning arm to take the place of Clippard/groom behind Storen. We have middle infield talent. We have center field options that could potentially fit in the picture post-Span for them, particularly if Goodwin stagnates. I'd really love Zimmerman, and am fine if we trade away talent for him, but a) We'd need a window to negotiate. b) It would probably be a "complex" trade in that, it's hard to imagine the Cubs trading away multiple young pieces without getting something to balance it out, either a 2nd veteran, or maybe some raw young talent. Would be fun. ____ 7 years for Scherzer seems sketchy, but I love Rizzo's aggressive off-season. Heck, his entire tenure in Washington has been a fascinating study in aggressive GM action, including going after high upside, but potentially high risk, draft picks. To add depth with Turner/Ross to the system was a coup to begin with, considering they gave up their 4th OF essentially and spare pieces (granted, they are sort of in need for a guy now with Werth dinged, and Taylor may not be ready yet ... still, veteran OF's are out there if they wanted something else). They dealt a costly late-inning arm for a middle infield option, buying them flexibility. They are slowly chipping away at their big list of impending FA's after 2015, making things a bit more manageable long run, and if this Scherzer thing happens, they either have deepest rotation in baseball (moving Roark to the pen), or they trade from their riches, still have a top rotation, and fill in needs/add young pieces (which could further give them flexibility to clear other impending FA's). For a system that should be getting thin considering the graduations/trades, Rizzo does such a fascinating job going for it now and planning for the future.

For all the talk about Scherzer, a part of me wonders, just speculating, if they are in on Shields (and flip Fister). Zimmerman would net more, but a ton of money is needed on Scherzer, and a Fister trade could probably add whatever they need or want. Still ... if Zimmerman is offered, there does seem to be the possibility of a match with the Cubs, but it'd probably have to be a somewhat complex trade. Would make for an exciting end to the offseason if the Nats went that route. I wonder when Shields/Scherzer get settled - have to think it's within the next few weeks, but all seems quiet.

Escobar at 2nd is probably the default option, but there seems to be a lot of speculation that they want to thin down their list of impending FA's (they did clear one with the Clippard move) and Rizzo had supposedly talked Desmond in that three team deal that fell through with the Mets/Rays. Furthermore, Desmond supposedly has turned down extension offers, so he seems likely to hit the market. That said, on the flip side, dealing Desmond would open the need for a middle infield bat again, and they would probably need something unique to move Desmond, so betting money is still against. Still ... fascinating move. Really like it for them ... 3 years of Escobar for an expensive setup man for one year. Good swap, even if Escobar is mediocre and on the decline.

fascinating. really wonders if this opens the door for a Desmond trade, which could net them some solid talent. Of course, that would take a big bat out of the lineup.

I think I like the Gattis trade more for the Astros than the Braves. It's a good return, but I've never been huge on Foltynewicz. I really don't buy him more than a 4/5 starter that might have a mid-rotation season or two if all goes well (didn't someone compare him to Jordan Walden this offseason ... I can sort of see that). I've never loved Ruiz - average at 3rd, and IIRC, reports all suggest average bat speed. If he goes to first, that power really has to kick forward a lot (although some expect it to). I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Andrew Thurman ends up the best of the bunch, but he's a long way away. Gattis has power and should hit for enough to have value, and added to their young pieces ... that could be a decent offense. Furthermore, unless I am mistaken, he should put up big numbers in that park. To be clear, on paper, I think this is a good return for Gattis, and with Atlanta in rebuild (I hesitate to use the word full ... as the Markakis signing still befuddles me a bit ... if you want a veteran OF who gets on base a bit without much pop, why not Nori Aoki. I guess there's a "defense" and "leadership" argument for Markakis, but seems a strange contract to give.). It's 2 arms with good enough upside and an intriguing enough hot corner prospect. I just am not personally huge on any of them.

My hunch is that the Nats are still waiting to see what happens with the Scherzer/Shields market. Betting money is still against them getting involved, but if the price gets close enough, I would never count out Mike Rizzo. He's already had a solid offseason, and if they sign one of those, they could certainly afford to deal a starter away to fill needs, short and long term. Worst case scenario, they go into the year with Danny Espinosa as a stopgap 2nd baseman. They have Turner and Wilmer Difo, so they could go for a cheap veteran stopgap. That said, keep in mind, they could look to add a 3rd baseman and keep Rendon at 2nd (while it isn't the preferred option, supposedly, according to DC radio awhile ago, it was discussed). Realistically, I doubt they would consider LaStella. I think it would take a prime deal for them to move Span. Keep in mind Werth is out for the start of the year, so they are already down one regular, and Span's defense in CF is significant for them. Furthermore, Bryce Harper has gone through his fair share of injuries in his short career so far.

Keith Law is confused that Tampa would do this with a Top 100 prospect at SS already. While I like Robertson a fair amount, he actually reminds me a bit of Zobrist coming up, and truth be told, I think he moves off short. That said, unless I'm forgetting someone, they've got some time, as Adames should start at A+, with Robertson at AA. I could see Robertson shifting to 2nd and being ... Zobrist-ish, although they have Ryan Brett in place for the near future. They've done a good job of restocking a farm system that had gotten thin. Think TT was making fun of Law's high regard for Hak Ju Lee. ah, okay. I thought that was a reference to Willy Adames.

It's bold. Mad would be fair as well. If some things go right and they are a bit lucky, it's possible they are in the playoff hunt. It's really not a bad roster, and in the era of the 2nd Wild Card, it's really not as incredulous as it sounds, despite the moves they've made this offseason. I wouldn't bet on it, but if they get some hitting .... If not, he could probably spin Zobrist off to a desperate deadline team. Still, giving up Robertson after giving up Russell is ... bold/mad. Keep in mind, Oakland did get Franklin Barreto in the Donaldson deal. Long way off obviously, but they've still got their "SS of the future". Sure, and they like the other guy, name is slipping me ... uh ... Wendell? Weddle? Something like that (the 2nd baseman from Cleveland in the Moss deal). So, from a middle infield perspective, they have assets. I like Barreto a lot ... I was one of the minority that thought it was a fairly solid deal for them from a rebuilding perspective. But Barreto is a few years further behind Robertson, so I just think it's interesting they gave up two middle infield guys, both relatively well-regarded, within a half year, both guys who, if they progress, could see the bigs in a couple years.

I'm not sure I want Longoria (unless the price was fairly low). He's almost 30, with a crapload of years left (what is it ... 7 more?) Sure the price is reasonable (really don't know the AAV off the top, but it wasn't huge ... albeit, if it's a typical contract, it's climbing), but there seems to be some signs of decline. At best, you have to figure 2-3 more years of prime performance, if he hasn't peaked already. Just not sure it's worth the risk. I'm definitely not against trading guys ... just think there would be a better option. Maybe I'm in the minority on Longoria, though.

It's bold. Mad would be fair as well. If some things go right and they are a bit lucky, it's possible they are in the playoff hunt. It's really not a bad roster, and in the era of the 2nd Wild Card, it's really not as incredulous as it sounds, despite the moves they've made this offseason. I wouldn't bet on it, but if they get some hitting .... If not, he could probably spin Zobrist off to a desperate deadline team. Still, giving up Robertson after giving up Russell is ... bold/mad.

Wouldn't surprise me if they are perfectly fine with Phegley/Vogt entering the year, and finding depth for AAA.

Fair enough on Rizzo ... he's Theo-grown prospect.

Keith Law is confused that Tampa would do this with a Top 100 prospect at SS already. While I like Robertson a fair amount, he actually reminds me a bit of Zobrist coming up, and truth be told, I think he moves off short. That said, unless I'm forgetting someone, they've got some time, as Adames should start at A+, with Robertson at AA. I could see Robertson shifting to 2nd and being ... Zobrist-ish, although they have Ryan Brett in place for the near future. They've done a good job of restocking a farm system that had gotten thin.

I think Robertson's ahead of McKinney. There were some A's fans that felt Robertson wasn't that far behind Addison Russell (lacks Addison's offensive ceiling (although Robertson's isn't bad ... good approach, some gap power), but there was some belief that Robertson might be a better bet to stick at shortstop ... to be quite honest, I'm not completely sure if Russell and Robertson stick at short). Either way, SS vs. debatable CF, with similar offensive ceilings should give the nod to the shortstop (I'd call Jaso/Castillo close to a wash). All in all, this is a pretty dang good return for Zobrist. Solid job by Silverman, IMO. I wasn't sold they'd get a high value prospect like Robertson for one year of Zobrist (and Escobar). Very curious on the third piece.

I'm a bit stunned, and am curious who the top prospect being shipped out is. With Semien in place, I wonder if they shipped out Robertson (which would be fairly stunning, because off the top, I can't remember an organization that shipped out two prime shortstop prospects like Russell and Robertson in such a short span ... of course, might be someone else instead of Robertson). In some respects, I find this offseason for Beane bolder than those big trades he made last year. He went for it last year. This offseason, it seems like he's trying to have his cake and eat it too. He's trying to restock the system while staying competitive. It's possible he spins pieces off midseason if things don't go well, but you don't make this deal assuming that happens. It's not hard to envision some things going right and the A's being a fairly similar squad compared to last year. They need some of the young hitters to step up (namely, Lawrie), but it looks like a solid rotation with a solid pen behind it, so if some hitting develops, it could be interesting. Still ... it's a bold gambit on Beane's part. Going to be very curious what the final breakdown of the trade is.

If we're being technical, Rizzo isn't a homegrown player (since he came up with the Red Sox and hit the majors with the Padres ... it's sort of hard to call that a homegrown player). Furthermore, one could argue that including catcher, it's possible only two spots break camp with guys that aren't homegrown (if you count Rizzo ... there's a decent chance Alcantara gets CF, leaving only catcher and LF). Add in Addison Russell in the upper levels and Schwarber/Almora ... and I certainly don't discount the chance that it could happen. I simply find it unlikely (as noted, I simply said, I think their wet dream won't happen). Too many things go wrong, even with smart guys. One only has to look at McLeod's two drafts with the Padres, neither of which look great right now (I believe he was in charge in 2010 and 2011 of the drafts there). 2010 really only has Jedd Gyorko, while 2011 had a load of picks, but only Matt Wisler, Joe Ross, and maybe Austin Hedges look really intriguing, although there are some decent secondary pieces, like Burch Smith (now, it actually wouldn't surprise me if Burch Smith was the best guy from that class, when it's all said and done) and maybe Jace Peterson. Furthermore, the Red Sox system in the latter years of Theo's time there weren't exactly hot (and I still argue (and I know I argued this point here and elsewhere) that their system was a bit over-hyped with guys like Jackie Bradley Jr. and those vaunted arms, most of which have become viewed as mid-end of the rotation/bullpen types (Ranaudo, Barnes, and so forth). Back to the Cubs (even before Theo and Jed came here, I had argued that their player development history in their final years elsewhere was somewhat spotty ... I think davell might remember that I argued that both systems were over-hyped when they came). I find it hard to believe that everything is going to hit and be just fine along the way. Let's see if Schwarber can stick at catcher and continue to hit (the wear and tear takes a burden ... Matt Wieters was supposed to be a monster ... his offense has never matched ... although to be fair, his defense was solid). I wouldn't be surprised if Schwarber could stick ... but they moved him anyways because his bat was just that important. Let's see Alcantara/Baez adjust in the majors (I actually think Baez will). Let's see if they keep Castro around for the duration. There's a lot of variables, and it's just unlikely everything goes right for the Cubs. Perhaps the unique happens and everything goes right for the Cubs. Let's be honest, if we are sporting an all home-grown lineup by 2018, this team has either won a title, or is on the verge of winning one, because if all these guys are as good as expected ...

I haven't read anything to suggest that Carlos Martinez's scouting report has changed, and coming up the ladder, there were a few reports I recall seeing a few years ago saying he had two 80 pitches.

You have to remember, Carlos Martinez, while having some warts, is a guy who is largely viewed as having at least two 70 pitches, and probably two 80 pitches. He gets groundballs to go along with a 4-seamer that he can overpower people with. If he developed as a starter, this is a guy with front line potential ... and he's proven that he can, at least, to some extent, play in the majors and succeed. There isn't a direct comparison. Now, I think Grichuk and Piscotty are a bit over-rated, to be quite honest - useful players, but for comparison's sake, I'm not so sure they are better than say, Nick Franklin, who was essentially the third piece in the last Price deal. I'm not saying we should or shouldn't - more or less, I'm saying if the Tigers were actually interested in that, I don't think we'd match up with that sort of deal. Now ... there are certainly those out there that view Martinez as a mid-rotation, 3 type starter with questions on stamina and a 3rd pitch. It's certainly possible CJ Edwards could become Martinez-ish, but Martinez right now has some major league track record to bolster him. * That said, I actually think Martinez and Grichuk/Piscotty is similar in value to what the Tigers gave up (Smyly/Adames/Franklin) to get Price. I think everyone, including myself, under-rated Adames value, and while Smyly lacks Martinez's ceiling (even before the changes the Rays asked him to make), he's got a deeper arsenal and seems a safer bet as a starter, and his ceiling isn't bad.