clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Trade Value

After the Padres traded away Josh Barfield, there was speculation the Padres would turn right around and trade for Marcus Giles. They still might, but the possibility made me think. It made me think, "Hey, I want a Marcus Giles." Then I remembered the Giants bargaining position for offseason trades. Not going to happen.

If Jonathan Sanchez or Noah Lowry aren't part of a deal, the player coming back isn't going to be that exciting. If Sanchez and Lowry are traded, the Giants will need to fill their rotation through free agency for the next few years. Neither scenario is really appealing, and the Giles-to-the-Padres rumors made me realize the Giants are going to really, really, really be in a bad spot for trades this offseason.

There's no reason to trade Eddy Martinez-Esteve or Marcus Sanders; both could be top-level prospects if their bodies don't betray them, but both have the trade value of a C-level prospect because of their health.

There's no reason to trade the interesting-not-great prospects like Nate Schierholtz or Fred Lewis; unless another team really holds them in high regard, it would be impossible to get equal value. The Giants hope that one of these types pans out, and they have more value as raffle tickets to the Giants than they do for another team. The organization can't just bundle the top ten position player prospects in the system like they were trying to pay for a movie ticket in pennies.

Unless another team really has a case of Hennessey fever, and unless the player coming to San Francisco has a brutal contract, the Giants aren't going to be trading this offseason. That's kind of a drag.

Comment starter: Steve S. put together his most recent list of his top forty Giant prospects in this thread. Is there a way to come up with a realistic trade using these names and 25-man roster names? I'm doubtful, especially as players from the '06 draft can't be traded until June.