« HoopsBuzz In Full Swing | Main | Crisp For Marte Done Deal? »

Trade Candidates Part 1

With the hot stove not all that hot at the moment, I thought I'd run down some guys who could be traded between now and July 31st in an attempt to peer into the future.  Part 1 of the series will focus on some of the players in their contract year.

Barry Bonds is unlikely to be dealt, given that the Giants have pinned most of their offensive hopes on him.  But if, for some reason, the team is out of contention in July and Bonds is looking more awful than usual in the field, a deal to the AL could be in the cards.  Adding Bonds at DH could mean 4-5 extra wins in the second half alone, so I'd expect a big bounty even with his $18MM salary and impending free agency.

We're all pretty much assuming Jose Contreras will be dealt.  Some say it'd be most prudent for the Sox to wait til spring training and take stock before sending him off to the Mets, Phillies, or wherever else.  On the other hand, if there was ever a time to sell high, it's right now.

One name I haven't seen thrown about in trade rumors at all is Greg Maddux.  I assume it's because he's over 40 and makes $9MM in 2006, but Mad Dog could be a big help to a contender at the deadline.  I've projected a 3.84 ERA and 1.21 WHIP; he's got plenty left.  Even if the Cubs had to eat a few mil, it'd make more sense to trade Maddux than Jerome Williams.  If the health of Wood, Prior, and Miller works out in their favor the Cubs could have a surplus.

Jason Marquis is projected to post a 4.43 ERA in 200 innings.  He'd be serviceable as rental for the season, and he's still on the right side of 30.  I'm not sure which teams will be chomping at the bit to give him the three year, $21MM extension he'll require, but someone will.

Mark Mulder is also under 30, though he's shown some ugly trends over the past three seasons.  It'll be interesting to see how Walt Jocketty views Mulder - perhaps Mulder will take the St. Louis discount to keep that top-notch defense behind him?

It seems that Andy Pettitte wouldn't be dealt by the Astros midseason pretty much no matter what.  Even when the Astros have been counted out they've made the playoffs, so it'd be impossible to justify trading Pettitte to the fanbase.

I'm fairly certain the Cubs will sign Juan Pierre to a long-term deal.  Especially if he hits .309 as projected and impresses the old hands with his bunting skills and work ethic.  Politically, Jim Hendry almost has to keep Pierre around in case one of the three pitchers sent to Florida pans out.

Jason Schmidt could be a hot commodity, but, like Bonds, is a long shot to be dealt.  I think the Giants would look for a young bat in return.

More impending free agents and trade candidates to come...

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/447826/4137622

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Trade Candidates Part 1:

Comments

The Cubs are better than last year and I don't think the Cards will run away with it like they did the last two years so I don't think the Cubs will be completely out of the division/wild card by the trading deadline, like they would have to be to justify trading Maddux.

I wanted Hendry to trade Maddux to the Yankees last season and put the 9 million towards Burnett, but now that he's here they wouldn't be saving any money for free agents and have shown they aren't willing to pony up money with the big boys

I don't know that the Cubs would have to be out of it to justify trading Maddux. They've got a lot of starting pitchers and could probably do without him if people stay healthy.

I don't know that the Cubs would have to be out of it to justify trading Maddux. They've got a lot of starting pitchers and could probably do without him if people stay healthy.

They do have a lot of pitching and I think a deadline trade could work well for them maybe offer him to the mets to reunite him with glavine I am sure the mets will be searching for pitching at that point

Maddux and the Cubs have a relationship right now that is based on everything BUT money. They will not trade him. They have one season left to make good on a promise and, more importantly, to make up for the mistake they made 15 years ago. As the cliché goes, baseball is a business, but it's not in this case. It's personal.

If anything, the Cubs may still try to get a more worthy number 3 starter and move either Rusch, Williams or a pitching prospect to get one (packaged with others, of course). Who knows... could even be Contreras.

The Cubs' relationship with Maddux IS based entirely on money. He left because they didn't pay up when they should have and are paying now for his past successes. Win 300 aside his 2nd go around has been mediocre at best. If the Cubs have the chance to trade him they should as long as he agrees to it.

Hopefully they'll find a way to package Maddux and Jacque together and make a run at Carlos Lee in the off-season.

Sorry to break it to ya guys, but Maddux is not going to be traded. Hes been our healthiest pitcher throughout these two years, and we could use all the help from Maddux. I dont think Hnedry would trade off Maddux because this might very be Maddux's last season, and many Cubs fans would disagree on trading Maddox (consideing all the praise and love they have for Maddux).

And Cubsfan, the Brewers have Lee for couple of years, and they seem to be serious about contending. And I think they will NEVER trade oiff Lee unless they do absolutely pathetic this season. I would like the Cubs to look at one young pitcher that i liked for some time, and that pither is Oliver Perez. Hes a hard throwing left hander, and I think he can be a solid number three pitcher. But, that means we would have to give up either jerome williams, and/or (depending on Miller's and Wood's health) Glendon Rusch in some trade.

Yeah, I'm sure the Pirates will jump all over that deal.

Cubs wouldn't get Perez alone for a nothing package of a #5 starter and a no-defense second baseman. Come on. Get real.

Yeah...after thinking about the 2003 trade with the Pirates, Hendry should at least make the offer Uncle Charlie proposed.

If you want Oliver Perez who I think is going to be nasty if he can stop kicking laundry carts. The deal is going to have to involve two good prospects possible something like Hill and Murton. That trade aint gonna happen

Jason Bay and Oliver Perez for Glendon Rusch, Todd Walker, and Cash

Jason Bay is one of the top 10 left fielders in baseball so I am assuming that part of the trade was a joke.

Perez has only had 1 good year you are correct, but he is 24 and last year was hurt for most of the year. His good year though was phenomenal he had 239 K's in 196 innings he could be great and they arent going to trade him for Walker and Rusch . That would basically be a salary dump for a 24 yr old leftie who can throw 97 not going to happen

Yeah...after thinking about the 2003 trade with the Pirates, Hendry should at least make the offer Uncle Charlie proposed.

Posted by: angelfan | January 27, 2006 at 12:36 PM


PLEASE DON'T USE MY NAME TO POST. IF A POST BY ME AGREES WITH ANYTHING UNCLE CHARLIE SAYS, IT'S PROBABLY NOT ACTUALLY ME.

PLEASE DON'T USE MY NAME TO POST. IF A POST BY ME AGREES WITH ANYTHING UNCLE CHARLIE SAYS, IT'S PROBABLY NOT ACTUALLY ME.

Posted by: angelfan | January 27, 2006 at 01:01 PM

Who ever you are don't use my name.

I'll admit Jason Bay is good, but not great. Oliver Perez at best is a #3 starter. Both players are kind of overrated so thats why you think Glendon Rusch, Todd Walker, and Cash
is a bit unfair.
Sadly Kyle, you do not have good baseball perception.

I'll admit Jason Bay is good, but not great. Oliver Perez at best is a #3 starter. Both players are kind of overrated so thats why you think Glendon Rusch, Todd Walker, and Cash
is a bit unfair.
Sadly Kyle, you do not have good baseball perception.

Ok even if I am wrong about both those two(bay is an allstar) then what makes you think walker and rusch is fair for them Rusch is at best a 4 starter and Walker currently could start at second for a bad team but is overall pretty average. So you are giving two old and average players for two younger above average players

I saw this little game get played earlier this week between Uncle Charlie and someone else. Apparently, he thought it was pretty clever and decided to use it himself. So, you win. I'll stop posting. I don't want the two of us to clog up this message board arguing over who the real one is. These people don't care. So, you guys can have your little Cubbie-love-fest on here. I'll find a different site.

By the way, if you're going to use my name, at least act like the pompous ass that I am, and use correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation.

Example:
"Who ever you are don't use my name."
Should be:
"Whoever you are, don't use my name."

Thanks.

I think Charlie is on to something...at the very least Hendry should at least propose the trade. The Pirates are a young team and the acquisition of Walker and Rusch would provide the type of veteran leadership the Pirates so desperately need.

"Posted by: angelfan | January 27, 2006 at 01:18 PM"

I'm happy to see you go.
Good Riddance!

I think Charlie is on to something...at the very least Hendry should at least propose the trade. The Pirates are a young team and the acquisition of Walker and Rusch would provide the type of veteran leadership the Pirates so desperately need.

I dont think the Pirates need veterans they have a young team built for the future they arent trying to win it all this year they are just trying to improve Walker and Rusch even for just Perez would be a step in the wrong direction

**Uncle Charlie I am glad that if you are going to use my name you at least used proper grammar

Kyle
- You seem to underestimate the importance of veteran leadership. I'm sure the Pirates would at least consider the trade.

It is one thing to get good veteran players with a lot of big game credentials but Walker and Rusch are just average big leaguers who really dont have much to offer. Getting Greg Maddux to help a young staff is one thing but Rusch doesnt have much to offer young pitchers

As it stands now the Pirates could have a pretty good young rotation anchored by two very promising young lefties. Maholm and Duke. If Perez stays healthy that is a fantastic core for the future I wouldnt morgage that for two average old overpaid big leaguers

Barry Bonds will NOT be traded. Period.

He IS the Giants. His presence alone is what is making the Giants money, and generating enough attendance and revanue to pay off the stadium.

I could actually see the White Sox consider moving Podsednik to his more natural position in center field and moving a somewhat hot rookie prospect, Brian Anderson, to a team in need of a center fielder and a very good late reliever to offer up. That could mean a guy like Matt Murton, who could make up for the offensive loss of Rowand, could be packaged in a trade for Contreras. Then, of course, the Cubs would have to find a left fielder--hopefully not named Grissom.

I doubt the Chicago teams will be making any deals with each other any time soon

the relationship between the cubs and maddux actaully could make it more likely he gets traded. a lot of times in a players final season when he has a good relationship with the team if its obvious they are not in contention then out of good faith they will help their team a little and give him a shot a a world series. obviously this is contigent on maddux being interested in such a deal and cubs being out of contention but its hardly out of the question. each of the last two seasons the astros were considering such a deal with clemens.

as for bonds you cannot say he wont be traded. just look at rumors case thats all you need to know. bonds really is not suited to play in the nl and you dont have to look to far to see a team in need of another bat in their lineup with a good farm system in the angels. it wouldnt surprise me one bit if bonds ended up getting traded there at the deadline if it makes sense for the giants.

Rumor,

Observing how the Cubs have worked before with the PR department, Jim Hendry would be committing suicide with the fans by trading Maddux unless the Cubs were just about out of realistic contention. Hendry will most likely be looking to add rather than subtract at the deadline.

Doesn't Maddux have veto power over any trade? I would highly doubt that he does not. At his age, and with his rapidly declining skills, there's no way he'd agree to "start over' in Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, etc.

Don't see anything about a no-trade in his contract...

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005_01_06_mlbcontracts_archive.html

The only players currently on the Cubs roster that are of the caliber of Jason Bay are the following:

Derrek Lee
Aramis Ramirez
Carlos Zambrano

Moreover, Oliver Perez isn't going anywhere. He's a 24 year old flamethrower that can be an ace and is still dirt cheap. If the Cubs wanted him, they'd have to offer up any of the following:

Felix Pie

Shorter list than I expected, but it drives the point home. Please be a little realistic Cubs fans.

Jason Schmidt is an interesting trade prospect, Rumor. His Cy Young-caliber season of 2003 is still fresh in the minds of GMs, and he's still in his early 30s. If the Dodgers run away with the West early and SF struggles, they may feel this is the time to deal Schmidt for some bigger needs--especially if they see last year's +4 ERA as the beginning of declining skills. His trade value may remain high only through mid-season. I think he'll always have good value, but perhaps never higher than now.

angelfan; Jasonbay...: Actually, according to quite a few sources, the Pirates had been trying to get rid of Perez earlier this off-season--most likely due to his injury issues last season as well as his continued voicing of displeasure with Pirates management. Besides that, the Cubs have made a habit out of fleecing Littlefield, so I wouldn't be surprised to see Hendry do it again, or at least try to do it again. I don't think it's going to happen, but I've been wrong before.

As for players on the Cubs the calibre of Bay, I think you're a bit off on that one. Prior and Zambrano have more value than any of the players you listed (then again, if you meant position players, you are probably right).

RM-
I might be wrong, but were those actual comments directed towards Juan Pierre?

positive comments

No, they were sarcastic compliments of Pierre.

The Giants could use Schmidt and Bonds to restock a barren farm system...it wouldn't be a bad idea.

The Cubs suck. We've heard a lot of talk from Cubs fans the last few years about how great of a farm they have in pitching but what has it got them? Now the talent cycle is declining if Hill is the best they have. And, all they've shown us is that they know how to run their talented arms into the ground. I bet Prior will bounce back once he signs with the Angels, Dodgers, or Giants. Good luck to him.

Mortie,
Hill would be a great arm in any farm system. 215 Ks in 155 innings in 2005. Cut his walks down by half in one season. Not a bad lefty, huh? And it's not just Cubs fans saying the Cubs have great pitching prospects. Why would the Marlins take so-so pitching in return for one of the most sought after lead off men in the game? The Yankees tried to offer better prospects for Pierre and couldn't. Does that mean the Yankees suck? Come on, stop hating.

Bonds won't be traded by any stretch of the imagination.

A) he has veto power and would only approve a trade to LAA
B) if he's healthy and playing well the Giants will be in contention
C) If B doesn't happen, then who would want him and his salary anyway?
D) As Zonis said, he's a huge part of the Giants revenue and would only be moved if someone really overpaid the Giants...and I mean OVERPAID

He's going nowhere.

Schmidt could be moved if Bonds got hurt, but it would take a lot as there won't be many arms avaliable at the break and Schmidt would garner 2 picks in free agency anyway.

The Cubs don't have good pitching prospects anymore. Rich Hill always seems to be about 2-3 years older than his level and competition. It's well documented that if you stick older players in the minors they'll rack up great K-rates. Being 25 and in AAA with a great K-rate doesn't cut it. Right now he should be in the majors solidifying a starting rotation spot, not just entering the big leagues. If Hill went to most above-average systems, he'd probably rate in the late top 10s if at all depending on the system. If he's the Cubs top pitching prospect, then they're in trouble because he is not a better prospect than Prior, Zambrano, or Guzman were. maybe Juan Cruz for that matter. Hill will be a 4-5 starter at best if he doesn't improve that control.

Working on his control is exactly the reaosn Hill has been kept right where he is, and that is coming along at a much better pace lately. He definitely has a chance to perform at a high level (better than a 4-5 starter) for a dozen years. If he can refine his changeup this season, he could be absolutely nasty. And at worst, his curve is such a great out-pitch, he could develop into a very fine closer. He may not be a better prospect than Prior or Z. So what? They're both #1 starters. How could he possibly be better?

The guy is 25 about to be 26. Control is as much a talent as velocity or stuff is. He can refine his control but expecting him to be a #3 starter at this point is a lot to ask. He does have a great curve and is a lefty so I think you're likely to see him as a ML RP at least. Though a closer with a 85-90 mph FB no matter how good his curve is is extremely rare. I'm not hating on the Cubs at all. In fact I've been a great fan of the Cubs system in past years. I'm just being realistic. The Cubs farm is not what it was 3 years ago. I think Pawalek is the best pitching prospect they've got right now but he's some ways away. Hill might be close but, he's really a C+ prospect because of his age and control issues. Can he turn it around and be a productive MLer? Sure. Is it likely that he will turn into a #2-3 starter with a dramatic refinement of his control in the next two years? Not likely. SPs generally are right around their control ceiling by mid-20s. They can improve but Hill should be showing more by now. Expecting more improvement and holding out hope smells a lot like the wishful thinking that Cubs fans have had for Corey Patterson for so many years. Why should the Cubs expect more from a worse prospect than Corey was?

I'm not saying that everything to do with the Cubbies is dire. I'm just saying that the Cubs fans of all folks should know what a good pitching prospect looks like and even those guys don't always pan out. Hill has too many blemishes to place him in the same sentence as other recent prospects they've had. My comparison of Z and Prior might be a little unfair because they are elite prospects, but, consider that Guzman might have been a better prospect than Zambrano was in spite of Zambrano having passed him in value now. Evaluating prospects is not so linear as some might make it out to be.

Mortie: I think I just got dumber for having read those posts of yours:) Hill, Marshall, Marmol, Ryu, Gallagher, Guzman, Pawelek, Pignatiello, just to name a few. And that, of course, doesn't include the list of pitchers who have made it to the big leagues--nor does it include any relievers...Yeah, you're right. No pitching talent in their farm system at all...

"Hill would be a great arm in any farm system."

No, that's not true. He's probably not even in the top 10 of lefty pitching prospects in the game.

Mortie: Let me start off by saying that I'm nowhere near as high on Hill as I am on Pawelek, or Gallagher, but he would be a great arm in any system. Maybe not on any team, but on any system. The fact that opposing GM's were lining up to ask Hendry about the availability of Hill should show you just how much other teams want him--even though he does need to refine his change-up before he'll be ready to start at the MLB level.

"Hill, Marshall, Marmol, Ryu, Gallagher, Guzman, Pawelek, Pignatiello, just to name a few. And that, of course, doesn't include the list of pitchers who have made it to the big leagues"

BA just ranked the Cubs system at #17 in baseball. Draw your own conclusions. I'm a big fan of Guzman and think he has spectacular stuff but it says a lot that someone with his injury troubles would be placed so highly in their top 10 even when he was on the shelf. Maybe Cubs fans have gotten so used to seeing their system among the tops in baseball that it's too hard to admit that the last 2 years have not gone the way the previous 3 did?

Dontrelle Willis is a painful reminder of what the Cubs gave up, but also a reminder that they can defintiely select and develop pitching talent at the minor league level. They've been doing it for years now. Position players are another story. Pointing out the Cubs' minor league pitching as a weakness--and saying that the "Cubs suck" because of it--is a weakly thin argument.

excuse me. I meant BA ranked the Cubs at #15 not #17.

And remember, pitching stockpiles are always in flux. You can't use them all at the major league level, so you develop pitching to turn into major league level position players. Hendry's been doing a decent job of that--not a great job. Despite the fact that the Cubs today don't have the pitching prospects they had two years ago doesn't reflect badly on the Cubs' ability to develop pitching.

Again I'm not hating on the Cubs. I'm just an avid follower of all minor leagues. A lot of times in the past several years, you'd see Cubs pitchers come into a game in the minors and it would be pretty clear that they're probably the best player on the field. The last year and the one before it hasn't been the case as much. Much of these beliefs in the Cubs system is based on faith, not facts. Go watch the minor league games. I can understand and don't begrudge Cubs fans from having faith in their club but, I'm just saying it's not as good as it has been as far as pitching.

Can they develop good pitching talent? Sure. Have they proven it? Definately. Do they have comparable talent right now? No. Anything else is just denial. I don't understand the reason why so many folks here won't see facts. Why bother calling future league-average SPs for anything more than what they are?

Mortie: The Cubs have also lost a lot of their top prospects the past couple of years. It is very rare for a team to be a contender and to have one of the top-ranked systems. The Cubs were able to boast that in '03, and the Angels, A's, and Braves can boast that now. Either way, one thing that Hendry is good at is stockpiling pitching talent, which the Cubs have a lot of (their low-ranking, I'll promise you, is because of a lack of position talent). With Wilken on their staff now, I'm not too worried about the Cubs rebounding to being one of the better farm systems in baseball within the next few years.

Mortie: Their teams and overall farm system are unarguably not as good as they were a couple of years ago. That is not a direct correlation to the level of their pitching talent, though. While they obviously don't have Prior or Zambrano in their minor league teams, and haven't for some time now, they have a very deep glut of pitching talent.

"Despite the fact that the Cubs today don't have the pitching prospects they had two years ago doesn't reflect badly on the Cubs' ability to develop pitching."

I agree with that wholeheartedly. The Cubs have shown the ability to develop pitching and I don't think that's changed. I'm just saying that don't expect too much from Hill. The Cubs currently have an interesting mix of reclamation projects who all have higher potential than Hill does in my opinion. Guzman, Williams. Those guys both have great stuff and no serious dropoffs in their repetoire. Hill's control issues should be a concern. If he can't count on anything more than his curve, I find it hard for him to go 3 times through ML lineups without getting hit hard. This is a shame because of all styles of pitchers the Cubs need right now is a Zito-esque soft-toss/great curve pitcher. Those guys don't blow folks away but they do have a good chance at eating a lot of innings and great endurance.

Mortie,
I agree that Williams has interesting potential. He could be the sleeper on that starting staff. Hill definitely needs to continue working on his control, but he made great progress between 04 and 05. As much as learning how to control his curve, if he can develop a straight change, then he'll have a legit shot to be a Zito-like pitcher. Funny you mentioned Zito, because I think Hill's potential has kept the Cubs from pursuing Zito as some have speculated.

You have to hand this to the Cubs--they've turned mid-level pitching prospects in trades for pretty good major leaguers: Murton, Garciaparra, Lofton, Ramirez, Pierre have all been acquired, in whole or in part, with pitching.

Everyone knows the Aramis trade is a stroke of genius. Murton is pretty good and I think he'll be a perfect #2 type of batter with his combination of strikezone judgment, bat control, and slap-hitting ability. I don't think he'll develop enough power to be anything more than that though. Lofton and Garciaparra weren't spectacular acquistions in more than name-value. Pierre stands a good shot at turning around his inexplicable drop in AVG. I just don't believe he's a .270 hitter, esp. when you consider how he did drop in his strikezone judgment last year but it was still a quality one.

Lofton was the biggest reason (offensively) the Cubs went as far as they did in 03. He was much more than a name.

Bonds won't be traded by any stretch of the imagination.

A) he has veto power and would only approve a trade to LAA - how are you sure?
B) if he's healthy and playing well the Giants will be in contention - huge stretch to state this as fact
C) If B doesn't happen, then who would want him and his salary anyway? - every big market team, especially AL ones
D) As Zonis said, he's a huge part of the Giants revenue and would only be moved if someone really overpaid the Giants...and I mean OVERPAID - The revenue thing, I buy.

I would just like to say that Andy Petite is a huge baby. He thought the Astros should have pushed the envelope. Well, I say good-bye. You, Andy, are not worth the 12 million they offered. Your ERA was piss pour at best, and who needs a 5 inning per outing pitcher. Heck, they could have put a middle reliever in and got the same production. At least now we have Woody and he is going to give a consistent 6 or 7 innings. You, Andy, are not worth more than Woody and he is older than you. So, take your 16 million and you can join the rest of the tits on the Yankees you trader. They can't get it together to make it to the WS with all the talent that George has stolen away from all the other teams anyway. What really needs to happen to you greedy suckers is a salary cap. The NFL has finally got it together with the Salary cap and you can actually sit and watch games that are competitive across the league. I love baseball, but I don't like what greedy players have done to the game. Whatever happened to loyalty like Biggio and Bagwell. Andy, you didn't need 16 million. You have more money now than you or your children will ever use. You are from the Houston area and I guess apathy has eaten you up. You wonder why you cannot get the fans into the game, it is because the players need to show some loyalty. If you, Andy wanted to bring a WS championship to Houston you would have taken the overpayment the Astros was offering to you and at least made your piss pour effort at 5 innings. One more thing and I am out. I am 37 years old and if the Yankees never win another championship in my lifetime I will die happy. I HATE THE YANKEES AND GEORGE. George, you need to quit buying off players and build your team like everybody else. What you are doing is killing the game and it sure hasn't worked for you. Try drafting and trading instead of overpaying.

Post a comment

This weblog only allows comments from registered users. To comment, please Sign In.