ImageImageImageImageImage

Official Trade Ideas Thread

Moderator: nykgeneralmanager

User avatar
JohnnyK
Junior
Posts: 415
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Location: Wolfern, Austria
Contact:

 

Post#261 » by JohnnyK » Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:24 am

NYKnSTILL! wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
ok here we go :noway:
not for Hughes
not for Tabata
not for Joba
and not Ian Kennedy (maybe) :roll:


The only untouchable should be Hughes, because he is ML-ready. The others are prospects, and noone has any clue how they will work out (*). Tex on the other hand is a proven, gold-glove first baseman on the right side of 30. You sure as hell give Texas at least one of the prospects above to aquire him.

(*) I have not done the math, but I'd guess that there is a pretty high fallout rate for prospects, especially pitching prospects where one injury can ruin a career.
34Celtic
Analyst
Posts: 3,406
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 02, 2007

 

Post#262 » by 34Celtic » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:36 pm

JohnnyK wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



The only untouchable should be Hughes, because he is ML-ready. The others are prospects, and noone has any clue how they will work out (*). Tex on the other hand is a proven, gold-glove first baseman on the right side of 30. You sure as hell give Texas at least one of the prospects above to aquire him.

(*) I have not done the math, but I'd guess that there is a pretty high fallout rate for prospects, especially pitching prospects where one injury can ruin a career.


Thaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaank you
HCYanks wrote:Thanks for reminding me Clay Buchholz is a couple of blocks away from me, Fox. Now I have to go hide my laptop.
User avatar
nykgeneralmanager
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 14,172
And1: 306
Joined: Apr 10, 2001

 

Post#263 » by nykgeneralmanager » Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:06 pm

JohnnyK wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



The only untouchable should be Hughes, because he is ML-ready. The others are prospects, and noone has any clue how they will work out (*). Tex on the other hand is a proven, gold-glove first baseman on the right side of 30. You sure as hell give Texas at least one of the prospects above to aquire him.

(*) I have not done the math, but I'd guess that there is a pretty high fallout rate for prospects, especially pitching prospects where one injury can ruin a career.

There is no way we can consider trading Joba, he is absolutely untouchable. I wouldn't trade Tabata only due to our lack of position player prospects. Only one on that list I'd consider dealing is Kennedy, I wouldn't even trade Betances and he is still in short season ball.
User avatar
JohnnyK
Junior
Posts: 415
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Location: Wolfern, Austria
Contact:

 

Post#264 » by JohnnyK » Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:21 pm

nykgeneralmanager wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
There is no way we can consider trading Joba, he is absolutely untouchable. I wouldn't trade Tabata only due to our lack of position player prospects. Only one on that list I'd consider dealing is Kennedy, I wouldn't even trade Betances and he is still in short season ball.


Sure, if all of those guys work out, you'd be pretty stupid to trade them. But the thing is, noone knows if any of them will actually do anything worthwhile in the majors. Double-A performance is all nice and dandy, but is still pretty far from where it actually counts. So if one of those guys, plus "fillers" (Clippard, Karstens...) gets you Tex, you certainly pull the trigger. If the Rangers start asking for two or more of them, it starts to get tricky, but not before that.
34Celtic
Analyst
Posts: 3,406
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 02, 2007

 

Post#265 » by 34Celtic » Tue Jun 26, 2007 6:33 pm

ARod is more untradable than Hughes....there I said it
HCYanks wrote:Thanks for reminding me Clay Buchholz is a couple of blocks away from me, Fox. Now I have to go hide my laptop.
cmaff051
Inactive user
Inactive user
Posts: 13,071
And1: 2
Joined: Nov 02, 2006

 

Post#266 » by cmaff051 » Tue Jun 26, 2007 6:36 pm

34Celtic wrote:ARod is more untradable than Hughes....there I said it


You are crazy. :crazy:

Arod has the potential to opt out and become a free agent. That in itself makes him more tradeable.
34Celtic
Analyst
Posts: 3,406
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 02, 2007

 

Post#267 » by 34Celtic » Tue Jun 26, 2007 6:43 pm

cmaff051 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



You are crazy. :crazy:

Arod has the potential to opt out and become a free agent. That in itself makes him more tradeable.


If Arod opts out Cashman has to give him whatever he wants...its that simple
HCYanks wrote:Thanks for reminding me Clay Buchholz is a couple of blocks away from me, Fox. Now I have to go hide my laptop.
cmaff051
Inactive user
Inactive user
Posts: 13,071
And1: 2
Joined: Nov 02, 2006

 

Post#268 » by cmaff051 » Tue Jun 26, 2007 6:47 pm

34Celtic wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



If Arod opts out Cashman has to give him whatever he wants...its that simple


Screw that. I don't care how good of a season Arod is having now, he's not going to hold this organziation and Cashman hostage. That's not how you do business. The Yankees are going to offer him a fair deal, and if he doesn't like it, he can hit the road.
User avatar
nykgeneralmanager
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 14,172
And1: 306
Joined: Apr 10, 2001

 

Post#269 » by nykgeneralmanager » Tue Jun 26, 2007 6:53 pm

JohnnyK wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Sure, if all of those guys work out, you'd be pretty stupid to trade them. But the thing is, noone knows if any of them will actually do anything worthwhile in the majors. Double-A performance is all nice and dandy, but is still pretty far from where it actually counts. So if one of those guys, plus "fillers" (Clippard, Karstens...) gets you Tex, you certainly pull the trigger. If the Rangers start asking for two or more of them, it starts to get tricky, but not before that.

I'll reiterate, Chamberlain should not go in any trade...not for Tex, not for ANYBODY.

You don't trade pitching for hitting, especially not top pitching prospects. Based on your idea that all prospects are crap shoots (which isn't true once guys start dominating AA) then the DBacks should deal Upton for Buehrle, the Red Sox should deal Buchholz for Helton, etc. All of which would be absolutely foolish trades. These guys are top prospects for a reason, the experts/scouts don't pick names out of a hat and say this guy will be good.

Chamberlain, Hughes, Betances remain in this organization.

EDIT: What is there about Chamberlain's stuff, makeup, or anything else that convinces you that he cannot be an ace and should be dealt.
User avatar
JohnnyK
Junior
Posts: 415
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Location: Wolfern, Austria
Contact:

 

Post#270 » by JohnnyK » Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:26 pm

nykgeneralmanager wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
You don't trade pitching for hitting, especially not top pitching prospects.

The Yanks have 3-4 top pitching prospects. If you can get one of the best first basemen in the game for one of them, I would say you certainly do it.

Based on your idea that all prospects are crap shoots (which isn't true once guys start dominating AA)

Even if guys dominate AA ball, they still have a long way to go to translate that into MLB success. Sure, chances are they make it, but they are not a sure thing. A guy like Tex is as close to a sure thing as you will get.

then the DBacks should deal Upton for Buehrle, the Red Sox should deal Buchholz for Helton, etc. All of which would be absolutely foolish trades.

You fail to take into account that trades are also based on team needs. The Sox don't really need Helton, the Yanks desperately need a first baseman though. Sure, everyone needs pitching, but those prospects are a while away - that first baseman is there though (although he doesn't seem to be on the market atm).

These guys are top prospects for a reason, the experts/scouts don't pick names out of a hat and say this guy will be good.
<snip>
EDIT: What is there about Chamberlain's stuff, makeup, or anything else that convinces you that he cannot be an ace and should be dealt.

I am not discounting Chamberlain, he definitely is a good prospect. But he is a P R O S P E C T. He is more likely to succeed than Random Pitcher X, but he is not a sure thing.
User avatar
nykgeneralmanager
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 14,172
And1: 306
Joined: Apr 10, 2001

 

Post#271 » by nykgeneralmanager » Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:41 pm

The Yanks have 3-4 top pitching prospects. If you can get one of the best first basemen in the game for one of them, I would say you certainly do it.

Exactly, we have 3 or 4, so give up a different one. He is the #1 pitching prospect of all those top pitching prospects. His 95-98 mph fastball and devestating slider rival that of Randy Johnson, although he is obviously shorter and right handed. Then when he throws in that nasty curve and developing change...wow. Give me all of that over Teixeira's 40 home runs. As I said, deal a different pitching prospect. Give them Kennedy, give them Clippard, I don't care who...but do not give them Joba.


Even if guys dominate AA ball, they still have a long way to go to translate that into MLB success. Sure, chances are they make it, but they are not a sure thing. A guy like Tex is as close to a sure thing as you will get.

Of course he has ways to go, but AA is the toughest level in the minors. While Tex is as close to a sure thing as you will get, Joba is as close to a sure thing in terms of pitching prospects as you will get (similar to how Hughes was in AA).


You fail to take into account that trades are also based on team needs. The Sox don't really need Helton, the Yanks desperately need a first baseman though. Sure, everyone needs pitching, but those prospects are a while away - that first baseman is there though (although he doesn't seem to be on the market atm).

HA! If anyone fails to take into account team needs, it is you. What we need most is pitching, and even more than that is YOUNG pitching. We have a chance to have a top 3 of Hughes-Chamberlain-Wang next season and for a decade after that...find me a top 3 better than that. I'll take Douggie M's defense and out 5.5 runs a game to go along with that pitching. Or we can always sign a power hitter in the offseason. Regardless, I can tell you that we are not going to find a 22 year old fireballer on the free agent market any time soon.


I am not discounting Chamberlain, he definitely is a good prospect. But he is a P R O S P E C T. He is more likely to succeed than Random Pitcher X, but he is not a sure thing.

He is more than just "a" prospect, he has a great chance of being the top pitching prospect in baseball to start next season (if he isn't in the majors already). This isn't a guy in low A ball who is strictly potential (such as Betances), he is no longer a guy based on projection, it is no longer about "if" he can do this or that. He can be in the majors by September. You make it sound as if he is 2-3 years away and he is all hype and hope.


Like I've said 5 times, it is not that I am against trading pitching prospects, just not great ones. I'll give them Kennedy AND Clippard AND Eric Duncan, I don't care. But they are not getting their hands on Joba.


Also, you still have failed to give me reasons as to why Joba can't be an ace or why he should be dealt. Your only reason is that he is a "prospect," which isn't a good enough reason for any owner around baseball.
User avatar
JohnnyK
Junior
Posts: 415
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Location: Wolfern, Austria
Contact:

 

Post#272 » by JohnnyK » Tue Jun 26, 2007 8:08 pm

I think we can agree to disagree. I don't think either of us is wrong, but there are definitely different philosophies at work. Tbh, I am probably still a little in the "the Yanks can buy anything they need if they want"-mold, that's why I am more willing to give up any prospect for quicker fixes. That doesn't mean the Yanks should overpay or give their prospects away, but it means the Yanks need to think more short-term than a lot of other teams, and if that costs them one of the top pitching prospects, then so be it.

nykgeneralmanager wrote:Also, you still have failed to give me reasons as to why Joba can't be an ace or why he should be dealt. Your only reason is that he is a "prospect," which isn't a good enough reason for any owner around baseball.


He can definitely become an ace. Heck, I don't even put a lot of stock into the reports of him having repeated weight issues, seeing that this often happens in growth phases. But I still believe that even being the best prospect in baseball should not exclude you from trades if it helps the team for the time being.
cmaff051
Inactive user
Inactive user
Posts: 13,071
And1: 2
Joined: Nov 02, 2006

 

Post#273 » by cmaff051 » Tue Jun 26, 2007 8:58 pm

So the Yankees should just trade anything valuable for a short term fix? So we trade Joba Chamberlain for Mark Texiera and then a year and a half later Texiera files for free agency and he signs with the Orioles? How does that help us at all?
User avatar
JohnnyK
Junior
Posts: 415
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Location: Wolfern, Austria
Contact:

 

Post#274 » by JohnnyK » Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:30 pm

cmaff051 wrote:So the Yankees should just trade anything valuable for a short term fix? So we trade Joba Chamberlain for Mark Texiera and then a year and a half later Texiera files for free agency and he signs with the Orioles? How does that help us at all?


Of course not. You don't just give anyone away.
But I am of the opinion that noone is untouchable if the right deal comes around. If Tex were a rental just for this year, you obviously do not do it. But if you get him for 1.5 years and are confident that you can extend him beyond that (or even better, see if you can negotiate now, and yes, I am aware of the Boras stuff and Tex' alleged inclination to play in Baltimore), you have to consider giving up even your best prospect.
Again, it's Mark Texeira we are talking about. He is a 27-year-old, switch hitting, gold glove first baseman. That is a fix for both the short and hopefully long term.
NYKnSTILL!
Banned User
Posts: 18,134
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 20, 2006
Location: In his deposition, Thomas denied any fireworks. "I'm not attracted to her, no," he said.

 

Post#275 » by NYKnSTILL! » Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:34 pm

JohnnyK wrote:I think we can agree to disagree. I don't think either of us is wrong, but there are definitely different philosophies at work. Tbh, I am probably still a little in the "the Yanks can buy anything they need if they want"-mold, that's why I am more willing to give up any prospect for quicker fixes. That doesn't mean the Yanks should overpay or give their prospects away, but it means the Yanks need to think more short-term than a lot of other teams, and if that costs them one of the top pitching prospects, then so be it.

-= original quote snipped =-



He can definitely become an ace. Heck, I don't even put a lot of stock into the reports of him having repeated weight issues, seeing that this often happens in growth phases. But I still believe that even being the best prospect in baseball should not exclude you from trades if it helps the team for the time being.


Image

NO !!!!


Image

NO !!!!!!

Image

HELL NO !!!!!!!!!!


thank you :)
NYKnSTILL!
Banned User
Posts: 18,134
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 20, 2006
Location: In his deposition, Thomas denied any fireworks. "I'm not attracted to her, no," he said.

 

Post#276 » by NYKnSTILL! » Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:38 pm

Celtics34 remember what I told you ?

http://www.realgm.com/boards/baseball/v ... highlight=

tell Johnny K the same 8)
User avatar
nykgeneralmanager
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 14,172
And1: 306
Joined: Apr 10, 2001

 

Post#277 » by nykgeneralmanager » Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:15 pm

JohnnyK wrote:I think we can agree to disagree. I don't think either of us is wrong, but there are definitely different philosophies at work. Tbh, I am probably still a little in the "the Yanks can buy anything they need if they want"-mold, that's why I am more willing to give up any prospect for quicker fixes. That doesn't mean the Yanks should overpay or give their prospects away, but it means the Yanks need to think more short-term than a lot of other teams, and if that costs them one of the top pitching prospects, then so be it.

-= original quote snipped =-



He can definitely become an ace. Heck, I don't even put a lot of stock into the reports of him having repeated weight issues, seeing that this often happens in growth phases. But I still believe that even being the best prospect in baseball should not exclude you from trades if it helps the team for the time being.

Yup, we'll agree to disagree. My overall point is that aside from team needs, team resources, or anything, you don't trade any top pitching prospects around major league baseball. That goes for Hughes, Bailey, Gallardo, Chamberlain, Buchholz, and anybody else so highly regarded. It doesn't matter if the "right deal comes along" (whatever that means), you keep those guys.
User avatar
moocow007
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 98,229
And1: 25,675
Joined: Jan 07, 2002
Location: In front of the computer, where else?
       

 

Post#278 » by moocow007 » Wed Jun 27, 2007 12:52 am

Ryan Sheally anyone?

Also, what exactly can Wil Nieves do that Sal Fasano couldn't?
User avatar
PR07
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 14,180
And1: 2
Joined: Jul 25, 2003
Location: PacersRule07

 

Post#279 » by PR07 » Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:02 am

I'd give Kennedy for Teixeira in a deal easy.
theknicks414
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,844
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 16, 2004
Location: Ca$hmoney

 

Post#280 » by theknicks414 » Wed Jun 27, 2007 12:36 pm

the yankees have good enough prospects other than Chamberlain and Hughes to get Tex.

a package of Kennedy/Horne(rangers choice), Marquez, Duncan gets it done.

Return to New York Yankees