Okay, then how 'bout this...

by LAGiantsFan on Feb 1, 2009 1:57 PM PST Comment 15 comments

Since my wishful thinking regarding the Red Sox and Roberts didn't fair so well, I'll ask you guys, why do we not mention trades like Alderson to the Cards for Brett Wallace? They don't really have a place to play the guy as he's limited to 3rd -- and eventually relegated to 1st, and their system is weak in pitching. I know that deal would have to wait until they'd be allowed to deal him, but it's those kind of deals the Giants should be making, no?

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.

0 recs | Comment 15 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

In addition to the points you mentioned as reasons that this trade you are suggesting won’t go down, Troy Glaus is out for awhile (at least until May or so) and Wallace has a good chance to be the Cards’ starting 3b on opening day (along with David Freese), so I doubt they’d trade him right now even if he was tradeable.

Bonds stands alone.

Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal

by nostocksjustbonds on Feb 1, 2009 2:07 PM PST reply actions

I might make that trade, and if a team with a logjam at 3B had the rights to Wallace, they might make that trade. The Cardinals don’t really match up.

If Wallace is limited to first, the Cardinals might make the trade…but then the Giants wouldn’t do it.

by Grant on Feb 1, 2009 2:12 PM PST reply actions

Like many of us up here in Sonoma I’d love to see Brett Wallace in a Giants uniform. For one thing, my wife was one of his high school math teachers, and knowing someone on the squad she’d be willing to attend a few more games with me each year. For another, it appears he can, you know, hit.

But lots of folks speculate that he’ll neither stick at 3b nor 1b and wind up primarily a DH. This remains to be seen, of course, but if there really is a substantial risk that he won’t cut it with the glove at all, a deal like this may be unlikely for any NL team.

by 2X2L on Feb 1, 2009 2:33 PM PST reply actions

With Glaus out it will be interesting to see how Freese does with his shot. If Freese can handle 3b and Wallace does come expendable SF should kick the tires. Have read his glove can play at 3b since his bat is so good. If Sandoval is not the 3b and with SF questioning whether Dizzy can play there the Giants will eventually need to look somewhere and why not a kid who can rake.

by wilriv21 on Feb 1, 2009 3:10 PM PST reply actions

no chance

wallace was specifically drafted to take over for glaus in 2010, when glaus is a free agent. he won’t ever win a gold glove, but the bat will be very impressive. alderson is a fine prospect, but i would not see st.louis making the deal unless they KNEW wallace can’t play 3rb.

by giantdonkey on Feb 1, 2009 4:45 PM PST reply actions

Don’t you have to wait one year after you draft a player to be able to trade him, anyway?

Never has a poster been more correct in the history of the internet. Ever! - ResDog on yours truly

by jcb9 on Feb 1, 2009 5:12 PM PST reply actions

he mentioned something about having to wait before they could deal him.

by kvdp12 on Feb 1, 2009 6:22 PM PST up reply actions

Alderson for PTBNL.

The Basil Fawlty Moderating Strategy:
"We could run a nice blog here if we didn't have all these members getting in the way."

by WalrusMan on Feb 1, 2009 8:05 PM PST up reply actions

Wallace would be just fine if he was converted into a corner OF… the Cards would probably do a Bumgarner for Wallace trade, but not Alderson.

Idolizing Robb Nen since 2002...

by Smoke on the Water on Feb 1, 2009 7:30 PM PST reply actions

I don’t think Wallace can be traded until June or so.

Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.

by jponry on Feb 1, 2009 8:02 PM PST reply actions

Right

Wallace may not be traded now. So while I like the concept of considering pitching prospects to trade for hitting prospects, this particular trade isn’t yet eligible to be done. And it isn’t likely that the Cardinals would trade a guy who posted a 1.109 OPS in AA in his first year of organized ball for Alderson.

by sharksrog on Feb 1, 2009 9:01 PM PST up reply actions

/reads post, including the part about how wallace still can’t be traded
//reads 7 different comments mentioning that wallace still can’t be traded
///ignores both, and mentions that wallace still can’t be traded

Umm, Wallace still can’t be traded.

..so allow me to present Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain as two sweet, sweet bottles of warming hooch.

by Cookyman on Feb 2, 2009 6:57 AM PST reply actions