Why the big rush to trade everyone for "B Level or C Level" guys?
by joe t on Jun 9, 2008 10:50 AM PDT
Email
PrintI have noticed people the last few days mention trading Molina/Durham/Winn for "B or C level" prospects. I guess I just don't see the point in that; we already have plenty of B and C level prospects and I don't see the good that will come to pass by getting rid of those guys (especially Durham if he decides to play somewhere else next season and we can get some kind of draft pick). Molina isn't blocking anyone and is one of the better hitters in the sorry ass lineup, Durham isn't really blocking anyone and is a decent hitter, Winn is kind of blocking Nate, so I could see potentially moving him but not for a C level prospect while still having to take on his a lot of his salary. If we could get someone to take him and his salary for a B level guy, then perhaps it makes sense (depending on the position the B level guy plays).
Prospects we already have, by position:
1b) Bowker, Ishikawa
2b) Frandsen, Velez, Denker
ss) Burriss
3b) perhaps Frandsen (does Harper count at 1b or 3b?)
OF: Nate Dog (sans the G child) and a whole bunch of question marks like EME.
C: Sandoval, Posey
OF and SS appear to be the weakest links for our B level prospects and I'm not sure anyone that we could net in a trade would be any better. If we could get a top prospect, well then by all means do so. As of now, my guess is that the best bet is to hold onto the guys and then let them leave via free agency and in the meantime focus on developing the guys on the farm and actually replenishing the system.
This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.
65 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Salary dump, for one
Also, playing the prospect lottery. Winn/Durham/Molina will play no role on the next winning SFG team, so you might as well move em now and get SOMEthing back for em, and you may just get lucky in the prospect lottery. Someone could break out, and you can’t win if you don’t play!
Billy Hayes: Nine more big-league plate appearances than you.
This
B-Level and C-Level prospects sometimes turn into A-Level players. Plus, these guys are too old and not so good that they will turn into Type A FAs, get offered arbitration, and get us draft picks, so we might as well get something for them now.
Also, it opens things up for the young players to play and get better. If we have a crap record, then we get a better draft pick anyway, and the salary dumps mean that there is more room to sign an impact FA for the next good Giants team (no more Zitos thanks).
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on Jun 9, 2008 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions
okay, but who would we open time up for?
Steve Holm?
Nate is the only one that I see, but the “salary dump” argument kind of gets tossed to the wayside when you consider that we would likely have to pick up some of Winn’s contract. Durham isn’t going to be a salary dump and we might get a pick for him anyway. Molina might not fetch much in return and there isn’t anyone waiting in the wings at C.
Velez and Burriss
Leone, maybe, Horwitz… basically the Fresno Grizzlies minus Scott McClain.
Billy Hayes: Nine more big-league plate appearances than you.
We won’t offer arbitration to Durham, and even if we did, no one would consider signing him until after the arb deadline anyway.
Durham leaves, that allows Denker, Burriss, and (bleh) Velez to play. Besides, Frandsen will be back next year anyway. If Winn is gone, Lewis and Bowker can play every day with Rowand, and if Bowker plays 1B, then RF goes to Nate-the-Second-Rate.
I hear you on Bengie, as Posey isn’t exactly signed or ready yet, but I think Bengie is likely to bring the most value back. I can live with STEVE HOLM! and either Eliezer or Guillermo at C while we wait for Posey and/or Sandoval.
This season is done. It’s really a matter of whether the team overachieves its way to 75 wins or sucks its way to 65. Getting anything from the vets is a good idea because none of these guys is going to be a part of the next good/great Giants team.
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on Jun 9, 2008 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Is arbitration still a requirement?
Did we offer to Pete Happy?
You have to offer arb, OR they have to be signed before the arb deadline.
I’m almost positive that’s how it works.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 9, 2008 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions
And now that I think about it, I do remember Feliz declining arb because I remember going nutsack crazy over the fact that we offered him arb to begin with.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 9, 2008 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Offering Feliz arb was a great move. He wanted a multi-year deal, so we knew he wouldn’t accept it.
..so allow me to present Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain as two sweet, sweet bottles of warming hooch.
In retrospect, I was definitely wrong about that. Not in retrospect, I was probably pretty darn wrong, too. I had promised at the time to make an “I’m the biggest idiot ever” diary if Feliz did decline.
But since you’re all suckers, I never made good on that promise. HAHA! Who’s the biggest idiot ever now!?
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 9, 2008 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions
It's okay, Howie
Some things just go without saying.
All-Father Watch: 1.19 ERA, 6 saves, 0.92 WHIP, 30 Ks in 30 1/3 IP
I like your term “prospect lottery”, however, I would use it in a slightly different way. In a poker playing type way where you discard a decent card or two in hopes of getting a better card or two. Let’s say SF has determined that a couple of prospects in their top 10 list of prospects will amount to at best is an average major league regular and nothing more. They could then possibly offer those players in trade for a player whose contract expires at the end of this season and then become a Type “A” or Type “B” FA which could net SF with draft picks that could be better than the players just traded away.
that's some serious out-of-the-box thinking
also, I trust no one in the SFG front office to execute on this strategy.
Billy Hayes: Nine more big-league plate appearances than you.
Ponson?
http://minorgiants.wordpress.com/
Where the relative merits of Joe Paterson and Daniel Otero are hashed out over knife fights and tea.
by RougeGorrila on Jun 9, 2008 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Speaking of Sir Sidney...
He got DFA’d by the Rangers “for disrespecting teammates and club personnel.” Ponspwned!
I forget if they offered Sir Sidney any arbitration.
http://minorgiants.wordpress.com/
Where the relative merits of Joe Paterson and Daniel Otero are hashed out over knife fights and tea.
by RougeGorrila on Jun 9, 2008 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions
also, (just occurred to me)
there would be serious salary ramifications for this kind of move, even taking on said rental for a few months. We’d have to ensure that the other club was paying. Which would be tough.
Billy Hayes: Nine more big-league plate appearances than you.
that doesn’t mean the powers that be will automatically sign the check, though.
Billy Hayes: Nine more big-league plate appearances than you.
That’s a gamble, and I like it. The team could rebuild traditionally, but some decent gambles would speed up the process without really hurting the future.
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on Jun 9, 2008 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Very interesting thought
i like it. plus, the casual fans would like the idea of the rent-a-players too.
Todd Jennings: Next up on the Non-prospect Backup Catcher Train. Next Stop: The Pine at AT&T Park
by Speedforthewin on Jun 9, 2008 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions
I do like the thought, but what if said rental player accepts arbitratioin, and the Giants’ would be stuck with him for next year at a large salry? Great idea, but big, big gamble.
If he is as talented as an Type “A” or Type “B” teams may be clamoring for him and sign before the date required to offer arbitration. If the player is looking for a multi year contract he may not be willing to accept arbitration if offered (se Pedro Feliz). If the player performs well for the Giants they may well consider signing that player to a one year deal.
If he’s that talented, though, wouldn’t it be a streach to aquire him with spare parts? Guess I’m thiking more a long the lines of a Richie Sexon type of guy.
See Sweeney to the Dodgers trade
Now Denker may never be a big league 2B, but the fact that we traded a 40 year old bum in Sweeney and got someone who hit a HR in the big leagues is the steal of the year. I’m not saying that every trade we make will return us a David Wright or something, but at some point you have to roll the dice…
Down in Front Meat!
by homerdrew415 on Jun 9, 2008 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions
That was just Agent Ned doing his job
Adopted father of the AnVil / GIANTSPACE™ returns!
by SoFa King Mike on Jun 9, 2008 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Good, we need a better spy network around MLB. After operative Littlefield was assasinated fired, it was like our own Robert Hanssen in Pittsburgh.
Down in Front Meat!
by homerdrew415 on Jun 9, 2008 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions
There was this guy who sucked in the minors, esp AAA....
And they brought him up late season, and he lit up the MLB. And still is.
His name is Albert Pujols. Just saying, a questionable kid is better than the dude who’s gone before you can make it to the top of your division, let alone the league.
Tentatively adopting Dan Ortmeier. And Boom Goes the Dynamite.
I think you have your Pujols history off. He had only 14 at-bats above A-ball when he made the team out of spring training and decided he was instantly one of the greatest hitters ever.
Your point stands, but I think you were thinking of someone else.
by Grant Brisbee on Jun 9, 2008 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, I think you’re right..
I don’t know who I’m thinking about, but I did think Pujols had a less than remarkable track record in the minors. Oh well, this is what I get for not researching. Maybe I could take Sabe’s job.
Tentatively adopting Dan Ortmeier. And Boom Goes the Dynamite.
by Andy from DC on Jun 9, 2008 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions
To do that, though, you’d have to not research AND drink.
Do you think you’re up to it?
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 9, 2008 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions
I cite gameday thread from 2 fridays ago as my proof that i can handle this.
Tentatively adopting Dan Ortmeier. And Boom Goes the Dynamite.
by Andy from DC on Jun 9, 2008 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Before the season started if we asked a majority of fans on this board if you had a chance to trade any of these players for B or C level prospects, would you? 95% would say hell yes!! There values are the highest they have been in a loooong time. Sabean needs to take advantage of this and not pull a Lowry by not trading them when there values are semi-high. Winn and Durham should be high priorities at this point. Schierholtz needs to be called up, hes raking it in AAA. I dont mind having Denker and Velez split time at 2nd. Let the kids play!
Agree with Delorean
Prospects aren’t as static as major leaguers. Just because someone is a B or C level prospect doesn’t mean that they will end up being a B or C level prospect. And conversely a lot of B or C level prospects don’t pan out. Out of all of the prospects you listed, I’d bet that three of them will end up being regular contributers at the MLB level. Maybe. or you can look at the Dodgers. They entered the season with Andy Laroche as the #1 prospect in the organization. Now it appears that Blake Dewitt (a B-level prospect) has surpassed him on the 3B depth chart. There is even talk of moving LaRoche to 2B.
As for the Winn/Durham/Molina situation. I agree with you on Bengie. There’s no adequate replacement there which is why I don’t think he will be traded. It would be like the Vizquel situation all over again, with no adequate filler at the upper minors to take over. Winn, however, needs to be traded. You listed Schierholtz, but Bowker is also an OF. Durham is similarly redundant. You listed all of the 2B options, all of which are not terrible. If the Giants traded Winn and Durham for a B/C level prospect at first base or third base, I would be a happy camper.
http://minorgiants.wordpress.com/
Where the relative merits of Joe Paterson and Daniel Otero are hashed out over knife fights and tea.
I’d trade Winn for a player to be named later just to get Schierholtz in the majors. We need to find out about Schierholtz. It will take 500-1000 at-bats to find out if he is or isn’t going to be a productive hitter, and that process needs to start soon.
I’d trade Molina for a pretty good prospect. Another team’s Schierholtz, for example. I wouldn’t just give him up for peanuts, as he still has value and he isn’t blocking anyone.
+ Uno
And, I’d pay good money to watch Brett Harper try to play third. Seriously, he’s a mountain of mine and I’m guessing he has the mobility of a Hut
Star Wars reference, my nerd force is strong.
Typing
as does Mario
Ralph Barbieri, heal thyself.
by ThrillisGone22 on Jun 9, 2008 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions
This is not the 3rd baseman you’re looking for (waives hand) move along
2008 Giants: A steaming pile of scrap!
Dallas McPherson anyone?
Down in Front Meat!
by homerdrew415 on Jun 9, 2008 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh wow..
My HTML skills fail me this afternoon…i need lunch
Down in Front Meat!
by homerdrew415 on Jun 9, 2008 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
No lunch?
That is why you fail.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 9, 2008 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions
that's a fair point
I think it might be tough to get that for Bengie is all.
If Eugenio can keep hitting 400 at AAA then perhaps we could move Durham for a bucket of balls as well. They hurt that kid by not having him there every day at the beginning of the season.
I dunno
I think as Giants fans we underestimate the value of Winn/Durham/Bengie.
http://minorgiants.wordpress.com/
Where the relative merits of Joe Paterson and Daniel Otero are hashed out over knife fights and tea.
by RougeGorrila on Jun 9, 2008 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions
First, make sure we're on the same plane of reality.
The folks who are proposing to trade vets are starting from the belief that the Giants are not going to the playoffs in 2008. There can’t be much meaningful debate between them and those who believe otherwise. You might as well have the Pope and a high priest of Odin discuss the afterlife. No matter what, you’re not gonna get His Holiness to believe it’s all valkyries and mead.
But even starting from that, the reasons for trading the vets varies:
Winn – blocking Schierholtz. Winn is a very average outfielder and will probably continue to be so. But we believe we have an average, yet cheaper, outfielder to replace him.
Durham – after his awful 2007, and turning 37 after this season, nobody’s sure how much Durham has left. He may have value now that won’t be there in the offseason. This is a classic sell-high case.
Molina – another sell-high case, although less urgent because he doesn’t look as close to the cliff as Durham, and because we don’t have an obvious replacement.
I would also add Aurilia in the same category as Durham (potentially on his last legs but doing well at the moment) and also Roberts, who is as replaceable as Winn without being as good.
I’d be perfectly happy if Molina remains a Giant. I won’t be nearly as happy if more than two of Durham, Winn, Roberts, and Aurilia are still on the roster by the end of the season.
All-Father Watch: 1.19 ERA, 6 saves, 0.92 WHIP, 30 Ks in 30 1/3 IP
+1
especially about the mead. Crazy Pope.
http://minorgiants.wordpress.com/
Where the relative merits of Joe Paterson and Daniel Otero are hashed out over knife fights and tea.
by RougeGorrila on Jun 9, 2008 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Almost Agree!
I am against trading Molina this year and would only trade Winn for the right (ready to start at MLB level SS) return. I do however agree that I would be disappointed if more then two of Durham, Winn, Roberts, and Aurilia were still Giants at the end of the year unless the small miricle of actually becoming a post season contender (within 5 games and above .500) is the case at the trade deadline.
I am assuming of course that you are expected decent but not great prospects back for Durham, Roberts, and Aurilia with only having to eat cash for Roberts.
by giantsrainman on Jun 9, 2008 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Why would any team trade an MLB-ready SS for a light-hitting corner OFer?
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on Jun 9, 2008 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Because they were really desperate for an outfielder, and had SS covered?
Although this also supposes that more attractive options (Matt Holliday) were either already traded or too expensive.
All-Father Watch: 1.19 ERA, 6 saves, 0.92 WHIP, 30 Ks in 30 1/3 IP
I believe we may have a terminology problem here
People are used to grades like they give out in high school, i.e. grossly inflated so that a B is average. When (serious) prospect graders like John Sickels grade, they’re using a legitimate C average.
The guys the OP posted got the following grades from Sickels this offseason:
Bowker C+
Ishikawa C or lower
Denker C+
Velez B-
Burriss C
Schierholz B-
Sandoval C or lower
We don’t know what Frandsen got because he was no longer prospect-eligible but he probably would have drawn a C+ or lower.
There isn’t a single one of these guys who grades as a solid B. If the Giants were to obtain someone who did, say for Winn or Molina, he would instantly become the best position-player prospect in the Giants’ high minors.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
+1
A-level prospects are rare and valuable and you are not getting one for a middlin’ veteran. If you have Teixeira to trade, then you might get one, but not with a Molina here or a Winn there. A B-level prospect is a pretty nice thing. Schierholtz, as noted, is a B-level prospect by the skin of this teeth, and I think he could be a major-league regular RF if everything turns out right for him.
The Giants have one (1) A-level bat in the system: Villalona. Some more B- or C-level bats would be a big help.
This Is An Excellent Point
If there is a B level SS prospect that is major league ready and has a better then 50% chance to pan out as well as say Fred Lewis has as a leftfielder or as we all expect Nate Schierholt will as a righghtfielder then this is exactty the type of player I would trade Randy Winn for.
by giantsrainman on Jun 9, 2008 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions
If I was Sabean
I would be exploring the possibility of trading for Brent Lillibridge of Atlanta. Winn, a reliever and cash for Lillibridge and a low-level pitching prospect?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I Was Thinking The Same This Last Offseason
But Brent is struggling badly in AAA with almost Bocock like offensive numbers. Lillibridge needs to show me more before I would pull the trigger on this.
by giantsrainman on Jun 9, 2008 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions
The more he shows, the higher the price will be
Buy low, sell high, n’est ce pas? Can’t get much lower than Lillibridge right now.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
back in the day? C+
http://www.minorleagueball.com/2006/11/26/182235/71
“I like him better than this grade implies but he’s getting old for a prospect.”
by wcw on Jun 9, 2008 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Giants Yankees rumor ???
http://blogs.nypost.com/sports/st/archives/2008/06/five_yankee_tra.html
I would rather keep Sanchez.
I'm an ESPN Insider!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
