I know its early, but these are potential trade ideas that could happen come the deadline if everything stays relatively the same. With my addiction to Out of the Park Baseball I like to play GM a lot. So I thought long and hard about some potential deals that could go down. Most of the trades before you going to seem very far-fetched and unreasonable and that's simply because I am not great at gaging a guy's value, but its the idea or basis of the trade that I am trying to get across here. But if I am right, this could be one of the most exciting deadlines ever. So let's get this thing started...
1. BEN SHEETS TO THE PHILADELPHIA PHILLES
The purposed deal could look like...
Milwaukee Brewers Receive:
SP Brett Myers
RP Ryan Madson
SP/RP Josh Outman
SP Joe Savery
C Jason Jaramillo
Philadelphia Phillies Receive:
SP Ben Sheets
OF Tony Gwynn Jr
RP Mitch Stetter
Much like the Carlos Lee deal, the Brewers could potentially send Sheets in a deal that does not necessarily cripple the team the rest of the way. As for the Phillies, the Myers experiment simply has worked the past couple of seasons and he is due 12.5 million next season, I believe that would be glad to dump that on another squad because if his struggles continue options are running thin on him. In return they get speed-burner Gwynn who could be a nice addition and simply did not fit into the Brewers organization and a proven ace to compliment Hamels. Also, they get a bullpen arm that performed well for the Brewers that is currently doing quite well in AAA. As for the Brewers, I believe Myers is a risk that they are willing to take. Myers has had good seasons that aren't too far off in the past, but his consistency and homeruns are a couple of issues. Also they receive a very underrated bullpen arm in Madson who has overcome his early season struggles. Outman, while he has had his struggles, is a lefty arm that could be helping the Brewers very soon whether it be in the rotation or bullpen. Savery is still a relatively raw arm and is struggling this season, but his potential is very strong and I'd see the Brewers hard-pressed to past that lefty up if available. Jaramillo has not had a strong year in AAA but the Brewers could use a good catching prospect and the Phillies should be more than willing to deal him with C Lou Marson having an amazing year in AA. The Brewers may try to go straight for the top and try to nab projected ace Carlos Carrasco, but with Sheets injury issues the Phillies may have a hard time paying such a steep price.
2. KEN GRIFFEY JR TO THE ATLANTA BRAVES
Atlanta Braves Receive:
CF Ken Griffey Jr
RP Jared Burton
Cincinnati Reds Receive:
SS Diory Herandez
RP Luis Valdez
C Clint Sammons
I believe the Reds have to realize he isn't producing like he used to and his name alone could draw a decent lot in return, they may hold onto Griffey if they continue to climb into striking distance of contention though. With Diaz out of an extended period and not having a strong season and also have oft-injured Kotsay in the OF, the Braves may just be the only NL willing to have Griffey patrol the field for them. I believe this will be a highly contested sweepstakes between the Braves and Blue Jays but ultimately the Braves come out on top. The Braves would also get a good young arm in Jared Burton to add to their bullpen. While Valdez is a good RP prospect, the keys to this deal lie in Herandez and Sammons. Sammons is a highly touted catching prospect, but with McCann in the way the Braves may look to use his strong season in AAA in the trade market. Herandez is a terrific young prospect who looks ready for the big league level and could make an instant impact on Cincy's roster.
3. RANDY WOLF TO THE HOUSTON ASTROS
Houston Astros Receive:
SP Randy Wolf
San Diego Padres Receive:
CF Mitch Einertson
SP Brad James
Randy Wolf should be a rather inexpensive option in terms of trade value available at the deadline. Probably no team in contention could use starting depth as much as the Houston Astros. The Padres seem to work deals that get decent returns so I believe they could get two prospects to get excited about in the future, Einertson is struggling this season but is still a good prospect. James is a very good pitching prospect who may be ready relatively soon.
4. BRIAN FUENTES TO THE MILWAUKEE BREWERS
Milwaukee Brewers Receive:
RP Brian Fuentes
Colorado Rockies Receive:
CF Michael Brantley
SS Brent Brewer
LF Adam Heether
Another big deadline move from the Brew Crew, but if in contention I don't believe they'll be scared to go out and snag a, more than likely, two month rental reliever. They have probably learned their lesson about overpaying for them with Scott Linebrick, but it is clear this bullpen needs help and Fuentes could provide a good closing option for this team. The Rockies should be unfearful about dealing Fuentes, especially considering as though they seem dead in the water and Fuentes seems prepared to hit FA. If they can get value over a compensation pick, I don't see how they couldn't jump on it. I believe both Brewer, a highly regarded MINF prospect which the Rockies could use, and Brantley, a well performing CF in AA, along with a good LF prospect.
5. DEREK LOWE TO THE YANKEES
New York Yankees Receive:
SP Derek Lowe
This would be one of my stunners, there is no doubt the Yankees are going to be in the market for a starter and the Dodgers have 3 pitchers who are coming up on their contract year. It seems sensible that they are going to shop at least one. Schmidt's trade value is incredibly low and while Penny may be the one to leave, his slow start could turn a few teams off.
6. PAUL BYRD TO THE CARDINALS
St. Louis Cardinals Receive:
SP Paul Byrd
With the retirement of Mark Mulder and poor back-end rotation performances the Cardinals could look to starting pitching answers at the deadline. Byrd could draw interest from a few different teams including the Cards, Brewers, Braves, and Astros, but if the Cardinals remain on the edge of the playoffs I could see them making this move to push them up.
More to come including returns on 5 and 6.
Sunday, June 1, 2008
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Maple Weapons?
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AoeAMrS5MoW15gPv0Ba94kgRvLYF?slug=jp-bats052908&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
Above is a recent story of a fan who has hit with a broken portion of a maple bat. From this story questions have been asked about how we can make ballparks safer. Should maple bats be banned? Should stadiums go to more precautions to protect fans? I have a real simple solution...
PAY ATTENTION. I am sorry but this sounds like another incident of a fan that was simply not paying attention during a ballgame. Fans have to recognize the risks that they are in with the seats that they select. The closer to the action you choose to sit, the more on your toes you have to be. Baseball gives plenty of time between innings for you to find other things to do. Stadiums are plastered with signs of "beware of objects leaving the field of play" and I assume fans can read, so fans have to recognize that when you are sitting behind the dugout you are putting yourself at risk. The speed at which a broken bat travels should give fans, at the very least, time to shield themselves. Unless of course they were caught up in other things. 90% of fans are normally able to dodge objects, it seems as though if action was taken you'd be punishing either the heavy majority of fans and organizations or the players themselves. Fans need to recognize their position on the field and what could potentially happen... just ask Steve Bartman.
A popular solution to this issue is ban maple bats, it's clear, it's concise, and it's reasonable. Well 2 out of 3 ain't bad. The fact is that players prefer maple bats or else they wouldn't have become as popular as they are. Players are under the impression that maple bats help performance and just that psychological edge could help hitters. It is true that maple will much more likely break than ash causing it to be more of a hazzard, but also they are more durable. While when cracked, maple are almost certain to break, ash bats have a higher probability of cracking. Send in the tree huggers because all more ash bats are going to do is require more wood. Also another advantage to maple to hitters is they don't have to buy so many new bats, which is probably another reason why the game is transitioning to them. It just seems as though you are punishing players for something that fans are adequately warned about.
Another solution may be creating more foul ground or having netting stretch out further. But then all you are accomplishing is forcing teams to put money towards stadium renovations and probably still have fans complaining on how they want to feel "closer to the action".
It would have been nice to see Dodgers have the decency to help her out with her medical bills. While it was not their responsibility, it would have been an act of good will. In light of this whole situation, by avoiding paying the bills the Dodgers have come off as the villians of the situation and I believe have just given more attention to the situation.
In all, I think the best solution is to recognize the risk and keep making fans blantantly aware of the risks they are in.
Above is a recent story of a fan who has hit with a broken portion of a maple bat. From this story questions have been asked about how we can make ballparks safer. Should maple bats be banned? Should stadiums go to more precautions to protect fans? I have a real simple solution...
PAY ATTENTION. I am sorry but this sounds like another incident of a fan that was simply not paying attention during a ballgame. Fans have to recognize the risks that they are in with the seats that they select. The closer to the action you choose to sit, the more on your toes you have to be. Baseball gives plenty of time between innings for you to find other things to do. Stadiums are plastered with signs of "beware of objects leaving the field of play" and I assume fans can read, so fans have to recognize that when you are sitting behind the dugout you are putting yourself at risk. The speed at which a broken bat travels should give fans, at the very least, time to shield themselves. Unless of course they were caught up in other things. 90% of fans are normally able to dodge objects, it seems as though if action was taken you'd be punishing either the heavy majority of fans and organizations or the players themselves. Fans need to recognize their position on the field and what could potentially happen... just ask Steve Bartman.
A popular solution to this issue is ban maple bats, it's clear, it's concise, and it's reasonable. Well 2 out of 3 ain't bad. The fact is that players prefer maple bats or else they wouldn't have become as popular as they are. Players are under the impression that maple bats help performance and just that psychological edge could help hitters. It is true that maple will much more likely break than ash causing it to be more of a hazzard, but also they are more durable. While when cracked, maple are almost certain to break, ash bats have a higher probability of cracking. Send in the tree huggers because all more ash bats are going to do is require more wood. Also another advantage to maple to hitters is they don't have to buy so many new bats, which is probably another reason why the game is transitioning to them. It just seems as though you are punishing players for something that fans are adequately warned about.
Another solution may be creating more foul ground or having netting stretch out further. But then all you are accomplishing is forcing teams to put money towards stadium renovations and probably still have fans complaining on how they want to feel "closer to the action".
It would have been nice to see Dodgers have the decency to help her out with her medical bills. While it was not their responsibility, it would have been an act of good will. In light of this whole situation, by avoiding paying the bills the Dodgers have come off as the villians of the situation and I believe have just given more attention to the situation.
In all, I think the best solution is to recognize the risk and keep making fans blantantly aware of the risks they are in.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Trouble's Brewing...
The Milwaukee Brewers have been an utter disappointment thus far this season and the fans are starting to get a bit frustrated. Following the collaspe of last season fans have suddenly been crying for the job of Ned Yost. Despite getting their first winning season in 15 years fans were outraged by the last season fizzle. This season the trend has continued and the team continues to play mediocre ball. Changes are going to have to be made, decisions as well on the future of this team. So I get the chance to play GM and post what I believe the Brewers should do to clean up this rather messy start or at the very least help themselves for the future and it starts off with the bluntest move of all...
1. FIRE NED YOST. His complacent, almost arrogant, demeanor is only effective when the squad is performing well. That natural "things will work themselves out" persona that he gives out has gotten very old and dry. The young squad is simply not rallying around it and it seems to have almost carried over into the field with bone-headed defensive errors and head-scratching base running mistakes. Also many will tell you this team just doesn't look motivated at all in the field. Yost has made his fair share of crippling moves during a game, not bunting with pitchers up to bat in certain situations and then asking your 5th hitter to lie down a bunt. He has over used many of his relievers, throwing Gagne for two consecutive innings only to have him close out the 9th the following night. But the most disheartening thing about Yost is his stubbornness. While the offense was struggling he seems completely unwilling to shake things up. It took Eric Gagne saying he didn't deserve the closer's role anymore to make Yost encouraged to make a move. I am not normally one to put blame on a manager before players, but Yost has simply made numerous mistakes and clings to his beliefs even when things aren't going right.
2. DON'T BE AFRAID TO BE SELLERS AT THE DEADLINE. This one comes under the condition that things are still going sour. After the season the pitching staff is going to need quite a bit of remodeling, which isn't debatable. The Brewers have put themselves into a good situation at the deadline to become sellers at the deadline. They have many expiring contracts of players that you assume are not coming back and could get a decent lot in the way of young pitching for them. It seems as though the harsh truth has come to Brewers fans about Ben Sheets, after the season he will not be a Brewer any longer. Plenty of large market teams that are focused on making a run could give the Brewers a prospect laden deal that would be too good to pass up. Also, the market for RPs does seem to be overpaying for them. The Brewers could get a decent return Mota and Torres, and potentially get ANYTHING of value for Gagne. The offense is going to be the bread and butter of this team in the future, so selling off pitching right now may not be the worst thing in the world. Uprighting the team next year is going to center around the remodeling of the pitching staff anyway, because the formula right now simply isn't working.
3. JIM SKAALEN NEEDS TO BE FIRED. This isn't even a question. Coming into this season this was supposed to be one of the most exciting young offenses in the league. With only one offensive Brewer performing at a typical offensive production for them, the decision is pretty clear.
4. MOTA AND GAGNE NEED TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE. Admittedly, both Gagne and Mota both have good off speed pitches, they can not rely on those pitches 80% of the time or to get them ahead in counts. Each of these relievers have built a career on overpowering hitters to get ahead and then finishing them off with those offspeed pitches. Each of these relievers has fallen in love with their off speed pitches too much. For Gagne the results have been terrible, once he opens with that changeup he can't seem to put a soul away with it, he couldn't even strike out Andruw Jones for Christ Sake despite throwing him SEVERAL changeups.
While two and these four suggestions are out there include firings, that does not dismiss the lack of production from this squad. Mindless errors, base running mistakes, lack of offensive production, and an inability to move lead off baserunners are all problems that players should have on their shoulders. I am sure these changes are far off from happening but each one should be considered, a very defining series vs. the Houston Astros is coming up then another against the struggling Diamondbacks, if the Brewers come out of the rest of this homestand with a losing record I believe changes are inevitable, you can not keep sitting back and settling for mediocracy.
12 Year Old Girl Banned for Being too Good
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/8178466/Girl,-12,-told-she-can't-play-ball-with-boys
Many of you have probably heard the tale by now of the 12 year old girl, Jamie Nared, who happened to be banned from a local league for dominating. If not, I have included a link to the story so you can even enjoy more reading. The league had the audacity to pull out a mixed gender rule to get her to comply and naturally the media has completely run with it and turn this into a story of sexism.
Now, while I in no way condone the league's actions of pulling out a law that had no relation to the actual problem, both sides are equally guilty in this situation.
In plenty of various sports leagues children dominate the competition. I remember in my little league we had plenty children that would dominate their league. Thus the league would give them an opportunity to improve their game and compete at a higher level. I find it hard to believe higher competition leagues are not giving this girl a chance to play, this is indeed an out of school league we are talking about so you would have to believe some league would be jumping at the opportunity to bring this girl in even if just for the press alone. So why doesn't she move up? So her parents can play on her image, get her press, and amplify that she was better than the boys. If she is truly aspiring to improve her game she should be more than willing to take her game to another level, not continue to be a big fish in a little tank. While being banned from the league was unjust this girl should look to further opportunities and almost see this as a compliment that the league feels she should be playing with better competition.
On the other side, I am certain other children have attempted to protect their egos and have continued to dominate in their league while passing up the opportunity to actually get challenged (god forbid). To pull out this rule is indeed rather sexist, you are depriving her of her freedom of choice. Hopefully this girl isn't stymied by her gender from participating in future male basketball leagues.
Also, the argument that the boys play differently when a girl is on the court is really their own problem. Jamie herself has agreed to put herself on the court with boys, if they continue to get embarassed it is hard to believe pride would not kick in to get them to elevate their game. Which brings up the other side of the argument, but having an overpowering player such as this, it is a benefit to the boys to try and improve their game. But this was an enjoyable after school league, so I can maybe let that point slide and understand playing for enjoyment... in which case why would it matter if she was dominating?
My suggestion, set statistical boundaries that require children who are dominating to take their game to a more competitive league. I am sure the league did not want to turn this into an issue of gender and found it rather disheartening when they read headlines of a girl who ruled the boys was forced out of the game simply because she was a dominating female. Regardless this was a necessary move for the league no matter the gender of the player.
Many of you have probably heard the tale by now of the 12 year old girl, Jamie Nared, who happened to be banned from a local league for dominating. If not, I have included a link to the story so you can even enjoy more reading. The league had the audacity to pull out a mixed gender rule to get her to comply and naturally the media has completely run with it and turn this into a story of sexism.
Now, while I in no way condone the league's actions of pulling out a law that had no relation to the actual problem, both sides are equally guilty in this situation.
In plenty of various sports leagues children dominate the competition. I remember in my little league we had plenty children that would dominate their league. Thus the league would give them an opportunity to improve their game and compete at a higher level. I find it hard to believe higher competition leagues are not giving this girl a chance to play, this is indeed an out of school league we are talking about so you would have to believe some league would be jumping at the opportunity to bring this girl in even if just for the press alone. So why doesn't she move up? So her parents can play on her image, get her press, and amplify that she was better than the boys. If she is truly aspiring to improve her game she should be more than willing to take her game to another level, not continue to be a big fish in a little tank. While being banned from the league was unjust this girl should look to further opportunities and almost see this as a compliment that the league feels she should be playing with better competition.
On the other side, I am certain other children have attempted to protect their egos and have continued to dominate in their league while passing up the opportunity to actually get challenged (god forbid). To pull out this rule is indeed rather sexist, you are depriving her of her freedom of choice. Hopefully this girl isn't stymied by her gender from participating in future male basketball leagues.
Also, the argument that the boys play differently when a girl is on the court is really their own problem. Jamie herself has agreed to put herself on the court with boys, if they continue to get embarassed it is hard to believe pride would not kick in to get them to elevate their game. Which brings up the other side of the argument, but having an overpowering player such as this, it is a benefit to the boys to try and improve their game. But this was an enjoyable after school league, so I can maybe let that point slide and understand playing for enjoyment... in which case why would it matter if she was dominating?
My suggestion, set statistical boundaries that require children who are dominating to take their game to a more competitive league. I am sure the league did not want to turn this into an issue of gender and found it rather disheartening when they read headlines of a girl who ruled the boys was forced out of the game simply because she was a dominating female. Regardless this was a necessary move for the league no matter the gender of the player.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)