RealGM

Rumours are saying that Phillies have had internal talks about re-acquiring D'Arnaud ( http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/11/b ... rnaud.html /)


Would you guys be interested in trading Travis + a lower level spec or two for Cole Hamels + him signing an extension.

Phillies probably wont be able to afford Hamels.

Interesting to think about. Considering we have JPA. The Halladay deal would then pretty much look like this:

Halladay for Drabek + Gose + Hamels

I think we have too many holes on our roster to consider a 1 year rental. 1B and LF are bad, CF is sketchy, our whole pitching situation is a mess, and who's our 2B?

edit: didn't see the extension part. well, sure I'd trade for him then, but he's not just going to sign on the dotted line. The Phillies would have preferred Hamels over a relief pitcher if he was intent on signing right now.

If it were only for d'Arnaud and a mid-low level prospect, you do that deal without hesitation. And that comes from a guy who expects d'Arnaud to be an excellent major league player. Hamels is pretty damn good and is just entering his prime.

A good rule of thumb is if your not going all in, you don't trade your best prospect for a guy that can/will bolt in a year.

If he signs an extension.

If Hamels is willing to sign an extension at a reasonable price then it's a no-brainer

D'Arnaud and Drabek (or Cecil) for Hamels

I don't see why we would arguably refuse an upgrade to our catcher position longterm for a pitcher that will only have a few good years left in his career.

If we trade D'Arnaud for anybody, they should be young.

Point A. Seriously doubt Philly downgrades their rotation unless they can sign another arm or get one via trade.

Point B. You realize if you package D'arnaud + Drabek for Hamels you essentially just traded Doc for Hamels and Wallace (Gose). Philly got Halladay, we got prospects and flipped them back more seasoned. Hamels is still young and you have to assume that he is going to get a huge contract when his name is called next winter (20m+). If AA is going to move a piece like D'arnaud I'd like to see us get an player back that is controllable contractually for a bit more time if we are not contending.

This just sounds like a bad idea to begin with. Having 2 catching prospects is not the worst problem in the world to have. Maybe if they include Dom Brown or even Phillipe Aumont my opinion of doing such changes, a bit.

I was thinking about this when I heard about the Phillies wanting to re-acquire Hamels. If he's willing to sign an extension that this is a trade I'd be willing to entertain but there's just something about Hamels that I can't quite pinpoint as to why I don't entirely trust him to be able to handle AL East hitting.

flatjacket1 wrote:I don't see why we would arguably refuse an upgrade to our catcher position longterm for a pitcher that will only have a few good years left in his career.

If we trade D'Arnaud for anybody, they should be young.

He's turning 28 this December. He'll be in the prime of his career for another 5 years at least. d'Arnaud hasn't even tasted Triple-A yet.

Again, I expect big things from d'Arnaud, and I'd really hate it if the Jays lost him. But... I think it's a no-brainer to go with the proven commodity here.

Lateral Quicks wrote:

flatjacket1 wrote:I don't see why we would arguably refuse an upgrade to our catcher position longterm for a pitcher that will only have a few good years left in his career.

If we trade D'Arnaud for anybody, they should be young.

He's turning 28 this December. He'll be in the prime of his career for another 5 years at least. d'Arnaud hasn't even tasted Triple-A yet.

Again, I expect big things from d'Arnaud, and I'd really hate it if the Jays lost him. But... I think it's a no-brainer to go with the proven commodity here.

For some reason I thought he was older...

But still I'm a fan of hoarding prospects until one or two pan out.

One A-level prospect (and scraps) for one extended #1 starter? I don't have any idea about player valuations, but wouldn't it cost more than d'Arnaud? I love d'Arnaud to death btw.

I wish we could just fleece a team for an ace like the Angels did with Haren. A 19 year old throw-in prospect in that deal has developed into a genuinely great prospect, so the deal is a little less repulsive now, but Joe **** Saunders was the centrepiece of the deal at the time. Dude's nothing more than a #5 starter.

Weems wrote:One A-level prospect (and scraps) for one extended #1 starter? I don't have any idea about player valuations, but wouldn't it cost more than d'Arnaud? I love d'Arnaud to death btw.

I wish we could just fleece a team for an ace like the Angels did with Haren. A 19 year old throw-in prospect in that deal has developed into a genuinely great prospect, so the deal is a little less repulsive now, but Joe **** Saunders was the centrepiece of the deal at the time. Dude's nothing more than a #5 starter.

I remember Richard Griffin praising Saunders when the Jays were in talks with the Angels about Halladay

I always saw him as a poor man's Buehrle

Well its not even a rumor (the Hamels part) so I wouldn't much thought into it.