 |
|
|
| |
« Graziano's Latest: Dunn, Putz, Laird | Main | Sherrill Unavailable? »
Giants Like Adrian Beltre
According to Henry Schulman of the San Francisco Chronicle:
The Giants like Adrian Beltre, believing he would thrive in the more fastball-oriented National League, but a source said they have not exchanged names with the Mariners.
Schulman explains that Giants GM Brian Sabean is open to acquiring players who can help in 2009. Hank Blalock was also on the radar, but now he's back on the DL. The Rangers told a white lie to the public regarding Blalock's injury earlier this week. The Rangers had their eye on Jonathan Sanchez, but I doubt the Giants would've entertained a one-for-one swap even for a healthy Blalock.
The Giants could also try the free agent market this winter. Available third basemen include Casey Blake, Joe Crede, and Dallas McPherson.
The Marlins seemingly would swap first baseman Mike Jacobs for catcher Bengie Molina, but the Giants aren't interested. They're also reluctant to trade lefty Jack Taschner, who is under team control through 2011.
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b9a69e200e553c3b6238833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Giants Like Adrian Beltre:
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Top Stories
Search MLBTR
MLBTR Features
Recent Posts
Rumors By Team
Monthly Archives
Live Chats
Tuesdays at 2 p.m. CST
If the Reds could get Sanchez for the untouchable Encarncion I would be all over that, surely he has more value then both Beltre and Blalock.
Posted by: schellis | July 30, 2008 at 12:42 PM
Beltre? i'm on the fence... he is WAY too expensive. If the M's eat some of the money, maybe... but there is no way I'd give up sanchez for beltre... that's a joke...
Molina for Jacobs? no way... Bowker isn't much different and he's 4 years younger... we know what jacobs is... bowker could turn into more... who knows...
Molina has value to the giants... he is handling a very young and very talented staff... that leads to growth... i'd have to be overwhelmed by an offer to move molina... and jacobs is a little underwhelming...
Posted by: rotorobby | July 30, 2008 at 12:46 PM
I don't understand why Blalock's most recent trip to the DL would bother the Giants so much. It's not like they're trying to contend this year so waiting until he comes of the 15-day wouldn't be that big a deal. It might drive his price down a bit, so maybe the Rangers might want to wait, but if you're the Giants, why do you care? If anything, worry about the fact that he's ALWAYS on the DL . . . but you already knew that before yesterday.
Posted by: schwemm | July 30, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Sanchez for Encarnacion is closer to a deal that might work... but i think the rojo's would have to add something... AA prospect or something...
I realize that I over-value sanchez, but a young lefty who throws hard is valuable...
Edwin had shown flashes, but he is still too inconsistant
Posted by: rotorobby | July 30, 2008 at 12:48 PM
As Schulman notes, the Giants think they can actually compete in the NL West next year with keeping Molina and Winn, and adding a 3B. I think they're wrong, because the division is having a down year and their competitors will all be better next year. But the Giants like keeping the last year of Molina and Winn's contracts for 2009 apparently, and not making a major play for a 1B, requiring them to see about Beltre.
I would prefer that they realize they'll need more than minor tweaking next year in order to stop wasting good young pitching (see: Cain, Matt), so I wouldn't be against them moving Molina for Jacobs (despite his low BA) and moving Winn to help offset the cost of a Beltre contract. As Joelcards says, a 3-4-5 of Rowand/Beltre/Jacobs and even Bowker/Schierholtz at 6 beats what they have this year, and they'd get to use Sandoval at C at 7 also. Unfortunately, I don't think Sabean is this ambitious and thinks it isn't needed.
Posted by: Steve Soto | July 30, 2008 at 12:48 PM
I can't wait till the Sandoval call-up in September. He could be a beast.
Posted by: The Management | July 30, 2008 at 12:51 PM
As a Giants fan, I would like to see Beltre, I really do think that the Giants should go all out into rebuilding mode, BUT, they do not a 3b anywhere near ready to come up yet. Dealing Sanchez for Beltre, however, would be a mistake. If the M's were serious about wanting to dump salary, then this deal should be able to get done for a lot less.
As for Molina/Jacobs - that is idiocracy. I want Molina to be dealt, but in return, the giants need to get prospects... not a 27yr old..
The Sanchez/Encarncion deal that schellis mentioned would be an interesting idea..
Posted by: putmeincoach | July 30, 2008 at 12:53 PM
If the Giants really think they can contend next year than Beltre would certainly be a great add. GG caliber defense compared to Castillo and Aurilia, both of whom are very sub-par. And the added power threat would obviously be a huge boost. Of course, it all depends on what the Mariners would be asking. Would they want to trade a top prospect when their farm system is finally thriving (after they get recent top draft picks signed)? I'm a HUGE fan of Sanchez, but I think the Giants would have to at least entertain the offer...Sanchez for Beltre. Sanchez, as nasty as he can be, is still very inconsistent and unproven. I wouldn't make the trade all the same, but like I said, if you're the Giants and your offense sucks like it does, you have to at least think about doing something to make an improvement. And Beltre would be a HUGE improvement (with the bat AND glove!) over what they have now.
Posted by: cobweb25 | July 30, 2008 at 01:02 PM
Though I would most likely make a Sanchez for Encarnacion trade. Both young, unproven talents that could develop into something special. And both under team control for a while longer.
Posted by: cobweb25 | July 30, 2008 at 01:05 PM
I thought Casey Blake already GOT traded. I'm confused now. Didn't the Dodgers send Carlos Santana (the catcher, not the musician) and Jonathan Meloan to Cleveland for Blake last week? Wait, am I dreaming? What's happening.
(clicking heels)
There's no place like home. There's no place like home...
Posted by: milehigh78 | July 30, 2008 at 01:32 PM
as a rangers fan, seeing hank go would be a love/hate scenario. he's got a strong fan base and is a home-grown talent, but i think the rangers are finally realizing their offense can survive without him, and we need pitching. i don't know much about sanchez, but he seems like a solid prospect.
and then hank has to go and get on the DL again. unbelievable. maybe if he comes back after his stint on the DL, he can again improve his stock and get traded in the offseason. but i think he has a club option worth around $6 million, so maybe the rangers will just waive him, and the giants can pick him up on their own accord.
Posted by: tmoney352 | July 30, 2008 at 01:52 PM
Trading Sanchez to the Rangers for Blalock would be too much, but would the teams do it for Chris Davis instead? Sure, the Rangers have Davis rightfully penciled in at 1B and then 3B for years as a cornerstone, but young lefty starters who throw 95 mph and are league-leaders in strikeouts don't come along that often either.
Posted by: Steve Soto | July 30, 2008 at 02:58 PM
If the M's can get a quality pitcher for Beltre, I would be all over that.
Posted by: ZBham | July 30, 2008 at 06:43 PM