Minor League Ball: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: BTB's Final Preseason NCAA Hoops Bracket

Shopping Trevor Cahill

We're all pretty much in agreement that Trevor Cahill is a good prospect although we tend to disagree just how good he really is. I see no reason to re-hash that discussion but I am curious to know how much relative trade value this "good" prospect has. The A's have a ton of pitching depth and a gaping black hole at SS. They just traded for Matt Holliday, who will most likely at least sample the FA market a year from now. If the A's are going to seriously contend in 2009 then one of the things they must do is replace Bobby Crosby as their starting SS.

Star-divide

So this exercise is pretty simple. Who is the best SS the A's could acquire in a straight up trade for Trevor Cahill? And I'm not talking about "Oh, well, Cahill is talented enough to get Hanley Ramirez... but the Marlins would never do that trade." Nope, this is about a trade getting done in less time then it takes to order a pizza.

Signed, sealed and delivered. Who's the best SS the A's could acquire right now in a straight up trade for Trevor Cahill?

Please explain the more interesting decisions in the comment section below!

Poll
The A's say good-bye to Trevor Cahill and hello to...? In no particular order...
Hanley Ramirez
8 votes
Yunel Escobar
41 votes
Khalil Greene
7 votes
Stephen Drew
18 votes
Jed Lowrie
18 votes
J.J. Hardy
65 votes
Ryan Theriot
2 votes
Reid Brignac
13 votes
Jason Bartlett
2 votes
Derek Jeter
8 votes
Miguel Tejada
10 votes
Jhonny Peralta
7 votes
Asdrubal Cabrera
8 votes
Brandon Wood
12 votes
Jack Wilson
5 votes
Jimmy Rollins
7 votes
Christian Guzman
2 votes
Jose Reyes
2 votes
Troy Tulowitzki
18 votes
The always popular Other! (Please name below)
7 votes

260 votes | Poll has closed

1 recs  |  Comment 72 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

JJ Hardy

Both because it’s a fair trade and because the Brewers want to trade him specifically for starting pitching.

by boonitez on Nov 16, 2008 1:48 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I picked Other just so I wouldn't have click the button to see results

Shoulda picked Jeter instead ’cause no way anyone else will!

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 1:49 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

lesser deal

i’ll settle for a hu/lillibridge/dejesus which i think can be had for a 2nd tier prospect or combo of players not including a cahill/anderson

by Asfan4ever723 on Nov 16, 2008 2:01 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Kinda defeats what I'm trying to do here

Who did you vote for, anyways?

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 2:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Whomever picked Khalil Greene needs to explain this one to me

At the very least you better be his Momma!

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 2:01 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I'd remove some of the others

before I’d remove Theriot who has proven to be a solid SS. Not flashy with a lot of range, but adequate with good on base skills.

by slurve on Nov 16, 2008 2:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I wanted to offer a full range of options. No harm in leaving 'em on.

Who’d you vote for?

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 2:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I didn't vote

but for future reference – anytime you want to see how someone votes, click on their username and its listed with that users comments.

by slurve on Nov 16, 2008 2:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Never noticed that before, thank you

I understand you having a problem with trading Porcello for a bullpen arm but what’s your beef with democracy?!

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 2:49 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

So none of the SS on the table are worth Cahill?

You do realize that Trevor Cahill isn’t much of a SS, right?

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 3:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Went Lowrie

I think the A’s would rather have him than Hardy, and I think he’s probably the best player here, other than the ones that would never be traded (Hanley, Reyes, etc.).

by aap212 on Nov 16, 2008 2:19 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Fair enough. Thanks for your time.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 2:20 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Lowrie...

is not better than Hardy. You must be a Red Sox fan. Lowrie is not proven and projects to be an average shortstop. Hardy on the other hand projects to be above average on offense and at least average on defense. Hardy has a better bat than everyone but Ramirez and Rollins. He can hit for power and average and looks really good in a very good Milwaukee line up.

Hardy is the best bat that might be able to be had for Cahill straight up. Oakland might have to give up more, but it is the best possibility and the one Oaklnad should try andgo for.

by joegonzo on Nov 16, 2008 2:32 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Well

1) I’m not a Sox fan.

2) You should try actually looking at the two players’ numbers. Hardy got an earlier start on his big league career, but Lowrie had substantially better minor league numbers. I would bet that Lowrie has a career OBP over 350 when his career is over. I wouldn’t bet on Hardy doing it for a single season. Give me something better than “looks really good in a very good Milwaukee line up.”

3) I was taking into account service time, which I’m sure would be a huge consideration.

4) If I were the A’s, I wouldn’t trade Cahill for any of them that’s potentially available. I was just answering the original poster’s question the best I could.

by aap212 on Nov 16, 2008 2:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I did...

look up the numbers. That is why I called Lowrie average. He does not hit for much power, does not steal many bases, and his defense is questionable too. Hardy has shown power IN THE BIG LEAGUES and while he doesn’t have an OBP of 350, he came pretty darn close this past season with a 343 OBP. Hardy’s power is what seperates the two. In every other category they are almost equal. Lowrie will probably not post a 350 OBP in the majors, but he will most likely be around 340. He will play about average defense and will have slightly below average speed on the base paths. HArdy will do almost the exact same thing in all of them categories, but he will have much more power and that will make the difference.

Also, I am sure that service time will not matter THAT much. Oakland is not afraid to spend money as long as they spend it wisely. Also, they are trying to win now. You can tell that by the fact that they traded for Matt Holliday whose contract runs out at the end of the season.

by joegonzo on Nov 16, 2008 3:58 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Off the mark

The Holliday deal is about more than one year of Holliday. Also, Lowrie’s total minor league OBP was 381, including a 410 mark in his prolonged stop at AA last year. Why do you think he probably won’t post a 350 OBP in the majors?

Ultimately, I think the two will be in roughly the same caliber of player. But having a guy with less than one year of service time is much more valuable than getting a guy who’s getting more expensive, especially when you’re trading one of the best pitching prospects in the game.

by aap212 on Nov 16, 2008 4:23 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think...

he could sustain a 350 OBP in the majors not only because of his BABIP, but also because his MLE for arguably his best year in the minorss at the age 23 in AA would give him an OBP of 324. This is no where near 350, but it is also not likely to be his OBP. His OBP is more likely to be around 340. Now his BABIP was around 330-340 almost always during his minor league career which suggests that he has been lucky alot. If it were to decrease in the majors(which is very likely) then his batting average would drop and so would his OBP. Now I will admit that he has above average plate discipline, but that is the only above average skill that he has.

Hardy, however, has slightly above-average plate discipline, average defense, above-average power, and a slightly above-average batting average. Lowrie might be pretty simliar but Hardy’s power is what sperates him from Lowrie. If Hardy did not have the power he would also be an average shortstop.

Now I do not think Oakland will be worried about a guy who is just entering arbitration this year and will not be making any more than 4 0r 5 million. This is not a team like Florida or Pittsburgh that can not afford players that cost more than 4 million. This is Oakland who has many more player that make more than 4 million and is not afraid to spend money if they are doing it wisely.

Also, the question was who is the best shortstop that Oakland can acquire right now for Trevor Cahill. Do you honestly believe that Lowrie’s numbers will be better than Hardy’s next year?

by joegonzo on Nov 16, 2008 6:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Not next year, no

But it’s a question of acquiring value. I think Lowrie will provide more, especially for his cost.

by aap212 on Nov 16, 2008 7:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Hardy...

will not make very much money. He will make around 4 or 5 million, but that is nothing to Oakland. They can afford it. Besides I would take the better player if I can afford it over someone who would cost less, but not bring as much to my team.

by joegonzo on Nov 16, 2008 8:28 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

AVILANCHE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Nov 16, 2008 2:39 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

WTF?!?!

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 2:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

mike aviles?

the 27 yr old, late bloomer who kc might shift to 2b

pass!

by Asfan4ever723 on Nov 16, 2008 2:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Question

Would you really trade Cahill for any of these guys, other than ones like Ramirez and Reyes, who clearly won’t be traded? I think Cahill is a more potentially valuable chip than any of the possibly available SS, when you take into account service time and upside. The Tigers need a shortstop even worse than the A’s, and you don’t think they would trade Porcello for one of these guys, do you?

by aap212 on Nov 16, 2008 2:50 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Just picking up a little info

The way I see it, Oakland has SP depth to make a trade that addresses an organizational wide weakness at SS. There are lesser trades that could be had but I figured I’d use Cahill as a baseline to try and see how big a deal could be had.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 2:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not sure I understand this though

Unless the As make a few more big pick-ups, they won’t be competing this year anyway. When they will be competing for real, Cahill will be just coming up. If they do want to compete this year, they’re going to have to make a number of free agent pick-ups, including Rafael Furcal who can play short. Why would they deal Cahill for a shortstop then?

TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems

by OldProspects on Nov 17, 2008 9:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Seriously?

I mean, you do know they just traded for Matt Holliday and are doing their best to get Rafael Furcal, yes?

I don’t think they’d trade Cahill, but they are definitely trying to compete next year. And in a three-team division, who can blame them?

by mraver on Nov 17, 2008 11:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes

If they get Furcal then obviously they don’t need another SS. Even with him and Holliday they might not be competitive, and if they don’t get him, then even Yunel Escobar probably won’t be enough to make them a serious team in 2009

TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems

by OldProspects on Nov 18, 2008 1:27 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

If they can't land Furcal they'll still need a SS, right?

Thus the question.

Added Holiday to the line-up.

Just play along and add Hardy/subtract Crosby.

Got Cust.

Beane’s still sold on Chavez at 3B (add or subtract at your discretion).

Buck/Sweeney/Cunningham to man 2 OF spots.

Suzuki is a league average hitter.

Ellis is a bit of a stretch to call an average hitter but his glove saves runs big time, he’s a plus overall.

If the A’s can figure out what to do at 1B (Barton or a FA fix) then you’ve got the makings of a solid enough offense.

Add a vet arm to the rotation (I’ve been advocating Randy Johnson on a 1 year deal) and you’ve got the makings of a possible contender. Sure, the young guys have to produce but every team has players they need to produce in order to contend.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 17, 2008 11:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

And who's going to start for this team?

Justin Duchsherer is currently their ace. Dana Eveland is their number 2 starter. I happen to like Gio Gonzalez, but him, Sean Gallagher and Andrew Brown isn’t exactly a stellar back-rotation for 2009 (in a few years, it might be). This staff might be alright if their offense was significantly above average. Which it isn’t. Your best case scenario that you list above has two above average hitters (Holliday and Cust), and relying on Ryan Sweeney, Eric Chavez, Daric Barton (who I actually do like, but whatever) and Kurt Suzuki just isn’t a recipe for success. The A’s are quite simply not a J.J. Hardy away from contending. Why would they deal a crucial piece from their 2011 team to win 80 games instead of 75?

TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems

by OldProspects on Nov 18, 2008 1:31 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Go back and read what I posted just above your comment

You’re asking who’s going to pitch two sentences below where I wrote Randy Johnson. You know, Big Unit? Tall, ugly guy who stands on the highest point of most baseball fields… I’m sure you’ve seen him.

So a rotation of:

Duke
Randy Johnson
Eveland
Gallagher
5th SP from Gio, Outman, Braden

Plus Mazzaro, Simmons, Anderson and Cahill in AA or higher as back-up. (Andrew Brown is a RP, I think you’ve got him mixed up with someone else.)

3 above average hitters in Holliday, Cust and Furcal/Hardy.

Suzuki is a league average hitter. The A’s should be able to find two league average hitters from Buck/Sweeney/Cunningham.

Chavez is a huge wild card.

1B is a bit of a mystery. Stick with Barton again or go out and buy another bat (‘cause the A’s have the cash to add another bat) and ship Barton back to AAA.

Let’s call Ellis a below-average bat but he’s one of the best defensive 2B in baseball, worth 15-20 runs saved with his glove.

I don’t think its a best case scenario to assume 3 above-average bats, 3 average bats, 1 below-average bats and 2 wild cards currently manned by players who either have hit well in the past or project to hit well in the future.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 18, 2008 1:57 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That's a potential playoff club perhaps

but enough for Billy Beane to be convinced to GFIN and trade his best prospect?? No way. Whatever way you cut it a SS trade is not the missing piece.

by alskor on Nov 18, 2008 3:57 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm sorry - I meant to add a sentence saying that the rotation

wasn’t a Randy Johnson away from being seriously competitive. Alskor’s right that the team you suggest might be playoff-competitive, but you’d be relying on a 44 year old who has pitched 240 innings over the past 2 years and Justin Duchsherer whose ERA was out of whack with his FIP and has never pitched more than 124 innings in a year. And that’s the top of the rotation.

All this being said, I think the As future is sufficiently solid that if they have the chance to add a good hitting shortstop, a Furcal or a Hardy, without mortgaging their future, it might be worth it. But considering even with them, it’s highly unlikely that they will make the playoffs, dealing Cahill isn’t worth it to do it.

TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems

by OldProspects on Nov 18, 2008 9:25 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The A's have nothing close to a real SS in the majors

or within three years of making a big league team. On the other hand, they have the most talented pitching prospects in the game right now. If the A’s could trade Cahill for Yunel (my vote), I would do probably do it. It sures up the SS hole without really damaging the pool of talent the A’s have.

by NateHST on Nov 16, 2008 3:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Personally I wouldn't trade him for any of these guys short of Hanley, Reyes, Tulowitzki

but that’s because I see a potential star in Cahill and low impact upside from the other guys. I would trade him Alex Rodriguez and move him to SS even though he’s old though.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Nov 17, 2008 7:36 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yunel is probably my preferred choice on the list

I’d like to dedicate this part of the thread to Atlanta fans who’d like to have a say. It is obvious that the Braves are willing to deal Escobar for the right pitcher. Now, whether you agree with that plan or not, could Cahill be the right pitcher?

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 3:15 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I wouldn't want Cahill for Escobar

I voted for Hardy, who I see as similar to Escobar. The main difference is Escobar has far less ML service time on his clock.

by mraver on Nov 16, 2008 5:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'd do Cahill plus

But not Cahill for Esco straight up!

by Jay212033 on Nov 16, 2008 7:13 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

on Escobar. In fact the only two guys on this list I would consider trading Cahill for would be Yunel first, and Stephen Drew second. I like Hardy a lot, but two years of him isn’t worth giving up Cahill IMO as it would likely take more then just Cahill to land him. If the A’s are going to give Cahill up for anything it should be a legit, cost controlled impact SS.

by JPShark on Nov 16, 2008 7:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I like Tulo

He had a fantastic year in 2007 that might have put him in the elite range (with reyes and ramirez) but an injury-plagued 2008 brought his value down a lot. It’d be risky for sure, because you don’t know which year you are getting, but if he gets back to form he could even improve on his 2007 stats because that was just his second year in the majors.

by diehardoaklandfan22 on Nov 16, 2008 3:30 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

??

This is silly. Without considering the contract status of these players it makes absolutely no sense to even consider what the A’s could receive for Cahill.

by randymilligan on Nov 16, 2008 3:58 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Who said you couldn't consider the contract status?

Wasn’t me… and I wrote the thing!

Factor in everything, what’s the best deal out there?

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 4:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I Chose Hardy

I think he and Escobar would be the two best they could get, and both deals would probably get done pretty easily. Hardy is set to make more money, and I think the Brewers are more comfortable with their next option(Alcides Escobar) than the Braves. Plus the Brewers could absorb the drop in offensive production more than the Braves, so a Cahill for Hardy deal could probably get done real quick.

"I hate the people that love me, and they hate me!"

by Brett Keith on Nov 16, 2008 4:50 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Except...

It would really make sense to trade Cahill for Hardy straight up, when you could prolly give up a LOT less and get Hardy. There arent a lot of players I’d trade Cahill straight up for.

Never, Never, NEVER give up

by hero66 on Nov 16, 2008 5:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe...

But this thread assumes they would trade Cahill straight up for one of these guys, and is asking which is the best player they could get in the deal. So I chose Hardy.

"I hate the people that love me, and they hate me!"

by Brett Keith on Nov 16, 2008 6:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I would never EVER trade Cahill, or Anderson unless it's for something insane.

But if I had to, I’d trade him to Atlanta for Escobar and some other prospects. We wouldnt be able to get Hanley or Reyes, and I think Escobar is the next best shortstop up there.

Never, Never, NEVER give up

by hero66 on Nov 16, 2008 5:42 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

heh

Atlanta people think Cahill plus for Escobar, Oakland fans think Escobar plus for Cahill. :-)

by mraver on Nov 16, 2008 7:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm an A's

fan and have to say Cahill + would be a fair trade for Escobar. Cahill is a great prospect, but Escobar has proven he can hit in the majors and is a fine SS. He has more value then Cahill IMO.

by JPShark on Nov 16, 2008 7:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes

I’m assuming, whether rightly or wrongly, that Atlanta would ask for Cahill plus Adrian Cardenas to fill the middle infield void left by dealing Escobar.

Would I agree to that if I was Beane? Probably not, but it’s not an outrageous demand given how good Escobar is.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Nov 17, 2008 12:51 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

He didn't say Cardenas would be a SS

Atlanta might then deal Johnson in a separate deal and look to sign a SS, or they might think Lillibridge can rebound and that they only need a placeholder.

by aap212 on Nov 17, 2008 2:10 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Cahill...

is not that good. He might be able to get Hardy or Escobar straight up, but don’t expect anything else to come back with them. In fact, Oakland might have to give up a little more to get them. Remember, these are shortstops.

by joegonzo on Nov 16, 2008 6:23 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

free agent

they will just sign renteria or furcal and keep their best prospect

by IHateMitchMustain on Nov 16, 2008 7:07 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Bobby Crosby

is 28. He stayed relatively healthy for once and he’s a free agent after this season. I’d say just playing him is the A’s best option perhaps. He’ll be motivated…might have a good season… they have IF’s on the way up… AND they’s get to hold onto Trevor Cahill.

Thats my choice.

by casejud on Nov 16, 2008 10:26 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Bobby Crosby is crap

He hasn’t hit and he played below-average defense in 2008. He’s essentially a $5.25 million replacement player that has spurred Billy Beane to pursue Rafael Furcal this offseason. The A’s do not have a SS prospect within 2.5-3 years of making the Show that projects to produce above replacement level.

Simply put, playing Crosby in 2009 keeps the A’s from contending in the AL West. If there’s no chance at contending for a division title then the trade for Matt Holliday was a huge mistake. Beane has his bad days, I’d like to think the Holliday trade wasn’t one of them.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 10:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Id still trade lots of guys before Cahill to get a SS

or sign another replacement level option to go with Crosby.

Hell, get the Red Sox to swallow money and go get Lugo. That would actually be a pretty nice fit.

Point is, I wouldnt go trading a top 20 prospect in baseball to fill one hole when I have lots of needs and an atrocious offense… Billy Beane wouldnt either, Im sure. He was pretty clear last year that he’s either “all in” or “all out.” Unless there has been a drastic shift in thought I have a hard time seeing them give up Cahill to be slightly more competitive in 09… because lets face it, as good as Cahill is he’s not bringing an All Star Shortstop they can afford back.

by alskor on Nov 16, 2008 11:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

To me, that's the wrong mind-set

For one thing, I’ve got half of the site saying Cahill, straight up, could land me one of Escobar, Hardy, Jeter, Tulo or Rollins. Those are All Star quality SS and the A’s have the cash to afford any of them.

More importantly, even the most hardcore Billy Beane hater on this site will admit that Beane has built up his organizational pitching depth. He’s got 7-8 quality arms at AAA or above. You said it yourself, the A’s have a lot of needs and an atrocious offense… why wouldn’t you trade from your pitching depth to fix those problems especially if you didn’t have any internal options to fall back on?! I don’t want to trade away Cahill but there is a certain logic to trading away 1 top 20 prospect to fill a gaping, bleeding hole rather than dealing 3-4 guys to do the same job.

As to Lugo, I waved his flag for longer than I probably should have. His glove is a problem and his bat hasn’t been able to compensate since 2006. He’d be a gamble, and he’s not the kind of gamble I want to take in a contending year.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 16, 2008 11:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Well, half the site is dead wrong.

Jeter, Tulo and Rollins could clearly not be had for Cahill, or even Cahill+. That’s just silly. No way in the world. Laughable. Tulo is signed to a very team friendly deal and is a core, cheap, young, star player. Why the hell would Colorado trade him for a pitching prospect- no matter how good? Jeter? Come on… Pretty much the same goes for Rollins, & he’s not far removed from an MVP campaign. Anyone who thinks Philly or NY would trade superstar, iconic players like Rollins or Jeter straight up for a pitching prospect has no clue what theyre talking about. Period. Would never happen. Heck, if the Phils wanted to trade Rollins they could get someone to better that offer(Just Cahill). Same goes for most of these guys.

A type like Hardy is all you could get and Hardy has his question marks – though I do like him. I question whether Escobar could be had – but even if he could, he and Matt Holliday alone do not come close to solving what was wrong with the 08 A’s.

Either way I still say no because I really believe Cahill is special. They have done a great job adding pitching depth, but not all pitching prospects are created equal… Id deal Anderson, Simmons, Gio easily before Cahill. if you want to deal from depth, how about the second basemen? Ellis was re-signed, so there is no pressing need there. I would definitely rather go Gio and Weeks for a legit SS solution than Cahill for an average SS with upside.

The most obvious solution is to find a shortstop in free agency, though. The A’s need impact bats and there simply wont be one available at SS – especially not one who can be had for Cahill alone. Guys like Escobar? Those are guys you look at as helping on a 6 year scale – that is not the type you trade for to help this year – out of necessity youre overpaying for a young, 0-3 guy. You could match his defense and production much more cheaply if you found it in a 32 year old – and for next year alone those guys are around and available – though I wouldnt say plentiful.

If Im Billy Beane, I find another stopgap at SS to pair with Crobsy and save my resources to find another impact bat, Id rather package say… (completely bullshitting now) Cahill, Weeks and Barton for Adrian Gonzalez and Kalil Greene. Im not sure San Diego would do that of course(doubt it actually), but the point is you need to add a lot of offense to a pathetic hitting club. That is the major need on this team – run scoring. In that light you dont go trading your best prospect for a SS – youre not going to add a premium bat that way.

by alskor on Nov 17, 2008 12:28 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

To nitpick, 10% of the site would be wrong by your figuring

40% says Escobar/Hardy which you tend to agree with. And personally speaking, as much as I like Cahill I’d deal him before Anderson. To forestall any argument, it would hurt to lose either one.

Oh, before I forget. The A’s can’t deal Weeks until he’s been with the org. for 1 year.

I like Escobar. I think his overall offensive game is going to improve and he’s a better defender than Hardy. Now, you’re right that Escobar and Holliday aren’t enough to fix the 2009 A’s (I knew where you were going, no worries) but you’ve got to start somewhere and in no way can the A’s hope/expect/plan on Cahill helping in 2009. The A’s have guys already on the roster that need to step up and if they don’t well, things look pretty bleak. Beane already added a premium bat in Holliday, now guys like Chavez, Buck and Barton need to step up. You can forget about asking Bobby Crosby to get better, some things just can’t be fixed. Trading for Escobar or Hardy adds Wins to the ballclub.

That is what needs to happen.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 17, 2008 12:44 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

How about Lillibridge for pennies on the dollar?

I think he’s a great change of scenery, buy low guy.

by aap212 on Nov 17, 2008 2:12 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

I'd have offered Greg Smith for him, but the A's don't have him any longer....

Offer Italiano or Lansford, maybe?

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Nov 17, 2008 2:31 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Something like that

The A’s have enough pitching prospects that they really have a couple at every tier now. I’m sure the Braves would take any kind of creditable pitching prospect for him at this point.

by aap212 on Nov 17, 2008 2:38 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The Best SS they could acquire for 2009 is Tejada

Assuming Hanley, Tulo, Reyes, Drew, Jeter and Rollins are unattainable.

Long term I would lean towards Y Escobar but I am not really sold on the bat… Nor do I think ATL is or they would not be considering moving him.

The reality is the A’s are MUCH better off over paying for Furcal or Renteria on a short term deal. Or my dream is pry Greene away from SD for a song. Sad thing about the Street trade is what a good fit SD and MIL would have been for him and as a trading partner for the A’s.

by novaoakland on Nov 17, 2008 3:13 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

OH sarcasm...

Yes getting a good player is always a good thing.

by novaoakland on Nov 17, 2008 10:29 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Renteria... no.

Furcal is first choice, even if it takes a 4 year deal. But there are a lot of teams pursuing the guy.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Nov 17, 2008 11:49 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

To remind of the A's SS problems

This is the A’s short stop situation, in essence.

Major League Ready, and I use that term loosley, the A’s have Bobby Crosby, Cliff Pennington and Gregorio Petit. None of them can hit. On defense, it would go Petit, Pennington then Crosby. Petit will hit for the best average, Pennington will have the highest OBP, Crosby will have the highest slugging. But thats all relative, since they will all suck and be below replacement level. Yeah, Crosby might have the highest SLG, but it will be like .350. Sure, Pennington might have the highest OBP, but it will be like .310. Sure Petit might have the highest average, but it will be .260.

Going a rung lower, the next prospect the A’s have who is at least a year away is Adrian Cardenas, who is more likely 2B/3B Bound. And to be honest, I don’t trust his bat-he hasn’t hit since he was acquired from Philly.

Then to find another SS, you have to go all the way down to the rookie leagues.
The A’s have 3 2008 drafties who look promising from their first half year of pro ball. Dustin Coleman, an overslot pick by the A’s, who hit .319 /.355/.458/.814 and Jason Christian, who hit .291/.404/.432/.836 in Vancouver, a very good pitchers park. Both will probably see promotions, but where to? Kane County as SS and 2B? Or will they send Coleman to Stockton and Christian to Kane County?

The final prospect, who is the furthest away, is another 2008 draftie who spent the year in the Arizona Fall League, splitting time between Short Stop and Designated Hitter, so who knows what position he is capable of playing. Nino Leyja hit .315/.383/.479/.862.

So to recap.
MLB Ready = NOTHING
High Minors = 1 Possible, 1-1.5 years away.
Low Minors = 3-5 years away.

facepalm.jpg

by Zonis on Nov 17, 2008 4:18 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

by himself

i doubt he’d bring back an mlb starter…because i truly don’t see him as an mlb starter yet….so figure on either a high-upside SS that’s still two years away or having to package him….

the escobar suggestion could make some sense if oakland included an outfielder possibly….or maybe escobar (and maybe a prospect if it’s cunningham) for something like cahill and cunningham/sweeney/murton/denorfia

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results.

by biggentleben on Nov 17, 2008 12:15 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Minor League Ball: Where the Future of Baseball is Discussed
Start posting on Minor League Ball »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Top-10 Prospects of the Last 20 years: Hitters
Pose_small
SHS 'spect list continued....101-201
Hu_080227mag_uptonscover_small
daveh's top 111 prospects for 2010

Recent FanPosts

Small
last year's rookies, kickoff
Small
How about a package of Maine and Castillo for Zambrano?
Small
BA PHI TOP 10
Img587561916661595
Top 15 high school MLB draft prospects
Small
BP BAL Top 15
N16115505_31581383_8646_small
Rising Stars Chat
Small
Dexter Fowler and UZR
Small
Teahen to the White Sox....
Planetterror_small
Stephen Strasburg is out of the AFL Rising Stars Game

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Carew_small John Sickels


Site Meter