Chit Storm

From a source close to the politburo:

The assumed meaning: Young pitching = Entire staff × [(Lowry + Sanchez)² - (Cain + Lincecum)]. Lowry and Sanchez are the only ones with obvious trade value who could conceivably be traded; therefore, if the Giants want to make a substantial roster upgrade, it has to be one or both in trade. Makes sense. But is there a chance that some trade value extends to the less-than-deified young arms in the bullpen?

*Pauses for dramatic effect*

Obviously, this idea was concocted after the fireman-fu of Hennessey's eighth inning and before the near-meltdown in the ninth. But while the trade deadline wasn't notable for much, it did seem like there was a craze for relievers. Octavio Dotel, Scott Linebrink, and Eric Gagne all brought back young players of varying interest. Comparing Hennessey to that troika is silly at this point -- those relievers all have a long record of past success. Not every team is looking for "proven and expensive", though. Teams like the Devil Rays and Reds want to rebuild their bullpens on a budget. Other teams like the Brewers, Tigers, and Indians could use bullpen help, but they don't exactly matchup with the long-term deals required by Justin Speier-types in the offseason.

Randy Messenger is a year from arbitration. Vinnie Chulk, Brad Hennessey, and Kevin Correia are entering their first years of arbitration. None of these pitchers will be prohibitively expensive, and I'd trade them all if it meant something from the Devil Rays' secret stash. There is a risk that the drop-off from those four to a Brian Wilson/Dan Giese/Scott Atchison/Kelvin Pichardo/Billy Sadler/whatever-powered bullpen would be substantial. Everything the Giants do to get the franchise back on track is going to be a risk.

Is it crazy to think that a sub-3.00 Messenger or Hennessey would be overvalued? Or is the first assumption -- if Lowry and Sanchez stay, it's helloooo David Eckstein -- more realistic?